Charming 1 mob in a dynamic camp in ANY ZONE will bug out the events, not just TT.

[Petgroup]

<p>*** Zones and Population ****</p> <p>- A number of mobs associated with dynamic camps (ring events) in Tenebrous Tangle have been made uncharmable to prevent certain situations that may break the events.</p><p></p><p>I have been saying this since KoS, charming any ring event mob will bug it out. Thats why the captured frogs dont get free'd, Ironfang ph wont spawn, High Guard Maverick etc etc etc.</p>As much as I feel posting this is gonna make 90% of the mobs everywhere, uncharmable, this is why everything gets bugged. <div></div>

[slyfer]

All I have to say is finally

[Pins]

<DIV>All I can say is, why not make it so charm doesn't screw up the ring event/dynamic camp instead?  I mean, if anything this will continue on till there's no mobs left for Coercers to charm as pets.  Fix the problems with a real fix, not a work-around.</DIV>

[Magic]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Pinski wrote:<BR> <DIV>All I can say is, why not make it so charm doesn't screw up the ring event/dynamic camp instead?  I mean, if anything this will continue on till there's no mobs left for Coercers to charm as pets.  Fix the problems with a real fix, not a work-around.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I agree!  I have a Coercer and have come across several uncharmable mobs.  What's the point of having a charm ability if it doesn't work on the mobs that I want to charm?  </P> <P>I charm for the purpose of making other mobs beat the stuffing out of my pet so that I can have the killing blow once I break the charm.  It's no different than my beating it myself without the charm.  That mob is going to die one way or the other.</P> <P>I think that rather than making the ring event mobs uncharmable, make a charm timer that prevents a re-charm within a set period of time.  Leave the currently charmable mobs as they are, without recharm timers.</P><p>Message Edited by Aljola on <span class=date_text>07-27-2006</span> <span class=time_text>05:08 PM</span>

[Wrapye]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Pinski wrote:<div>All I can say is, why not make it so charm doesn't screw up the ring event/dynamic camp instead?  I mean, if anything this will continue on till there's no mobs left for Coercers to charm as pets.  Fix the problems with a real fix, not a work-around.</div><hr></blockquote>As the 'fix' to charming of the plants in TT demonstrate, that is not the preferred method.  Evidently it is better to make a mob uncharmable than to rework the way a core dynamic operates.  The former takes much less time (clicking a box that says 'not charmable = true') than to alter the code for ring events.  Developers never take the more time-consuming course unless there is something truly [Removed for Content] with the system that effects everyone negatively who interacts with it (e.g. pre-LU24 tradeskilling).</div><p>Message Edited by sacremon on <span class=date_text>07-28-2006</span> <span class=time_text>02:50 PM</span>

[Jida]

<div><blockquote><hr>sacremon wrote:<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Pinski wrote:<div>All I can say is, why not make it so charm doesn't screw up the ring event/dynamic camp instead?  I mean, if anything this will continue on till there's no mobs left for Coercers to charm as pets.  Fix the problems with a real fix, not a work-around.</div><hr></blockquote>As the 'fix' to charming of the plants in TT demonstrate, that is not the preferred method.  Evidently it is better to make a mob uncharmable than to rework the way a core dynamic operates.  The former takes much less time (clicking a box that says 'not charmable = true') than to alter the code for ring events.  Developers never take the more time-consuming course unless there is something truly [Removed for Content] with the system that effects everyone negatively who interacts with it (e.g. pre-LU24 tradeskilling).</div><p>Message Edited by sacremon on <span class="date_text">07-28-2006</span> <span class="time_text">02:50 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>fixing ring event's with not killing all the mobs required for the ringevent to complete would lead to a chance of abuse. 5 chanters in a farming team... each charm a mob in teh group.. total of 6 mobs available.. they kill the last.. named spawns.. they send the 5 mobs that they stole to insta pop the named.. rinse and repeat (break and recharm).. named pops... Would be insanely hard to code otherwise.IMO BTW <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[Wrapye]

<blockquote><hr>Jida wrote:<div> fixing ring event's with not killing all the mobs required for the ringevent to complete would lead to a chance of abuse. 5 chanters in a farming team... each charm a mob in teh group.. total of 6 mobs available.. they kill the last.. named spawns.. they send the 5 mobs that they stole to insta pop the named.. rinse and repeat (break and recharm).. named pops... Would be insanely hard to code otherwise.IMO BTW <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote>Pfft.  That would require five coercers be on a server at the same time.  Not a realistic scenario <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div>

[Jida]

<div><blockquote><hr>sacremon wrote:<blockquote><hr>Jida wrote:<div> fixing ring event's with not killing all the mobs required for the ringevent to complete would lead to a chance of abuse. 5 chanters in a farming team... each charm a mob in teh group.. total of 6 mobs available.. they kill the last.. named spawns.. they send the 5 mobs that they stole to insta pop the named.. rinse and repeat (break and recharm).. named pops... Would be insanely hard to code otherwise.IMO BTW <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><hr></blockquote>Pfft.  That would require five coercers be on a server at the same time.  Not a realistic scenario <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Ha... not realistic.. but possible.. <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[Yarginis]

But would that really be an exploit because the 5 people could have easily killed the named anyways? It's not like a single Coercer could accomplish this.<div></div>

[Pins]

<blockquote><hr>Yargnit wrote:But would that really be an exploit because the 5 people could have easily killed the named anyways? It's not like a single Coercer could accomplish this.<div></div><hr></blockquote>Obviously you didn't read the post very carefully. 5 coercers each charm 1 of 6 mobs, and kill the 6th. Named spawns, kill it, de-charm one, kill it, named spawns, kill it, and so on.Of course, you could just code it so that way if a mob is charmed from a ring event, the ring event will just not continue on, until the charm is dropped, then the ring event resets. Or just as easy solution, have ring events reset once an hour or so.

[Rijacki]

<div><blockquote><hr>Pinski wrote:Of course, you could just code it so that way if a mob is charmed from a ring event, the ring event will just not continue on, until the charm is dropped, then the ring event resets. Or just as easy solution, have ring events reset once an hour or so.<hr></blockquote>This is the way it is coded now and it breaks the event for others since a co-ercer can charm something and wander off with it making the even not reset until the charm is dropped and that mob returns.  However, sometimes it doesn't return or is killed far far from where it was charmed and thus it breaks the event until the next server reset (which isn't every night).Having events automatically reset at a certain time interval doesn't work either because someone could be fighting it at about the extent of that interval and suddenly it resets and repops fresh (which is something they've had to deal with in having time related events in some of the redesigned newbie areas).  Marking it as reset only if not engaged wouldn't work if one of them is charmed and taken away since it would count as engaged.About the only way -I- could see to change it to accomodate both sides would be to have a charmed mob count as "dead" to the encounter (with its usual respawn timer started) -and- as a generic mob of a similar type from the point of charming until it's dead.  Then it would also negate the possibility of a group of co-ercers exploiting charm to round-robin spawn a Named in a ring event because the ring event would no longer recognise any of those charmed as a part of it.  It could, though, make a ring event a lot easier by removing certain members of it, but an enchanter could do that with Mez, too.</div>

[Soldancer]

-<p>Message Edited by Soldancer on <span class=date_text>08-25-2006</span> <span class=time_text>08:28 PM</span>

[Jida]

<div><blockquote><hr>Soldancer wrote:Rijacki wrote: "... to have a charmed mob count as "dead" ..."Problem: Coercer could then flood the zone with mobs (charm mob, wait until the additional mob spawn, release charmed mob - repeat until zone is flooded with additional mobs).<hr></blockquote>sigh.. or even worse....6 mobs in ring event.. charm 1.. run off the rest... drop charm mob off.. go back.. charm next mob before ring event resets... run off mobs... rinse / repeat till named spawns.. if 2 Coercers.. much easier... </div>

[Wrapye]

<blockquote><hr>Soldancer wrote:Rijacki wrote: "... to have a charmed mob count as "dead" ..."Problem: Coercer could then flood the zone with mobs (charm mob, wait until the additional mob spawn, release charmed mob - repeat until zone is flooded with additional mobs).<hr></blockquote>That would have to be one very bored coercer, given you are talking about generating a new mob once every five minutes at best.  It would take at least two hours to generate 24 excess mobs.  I think most zones could handle that.  There are more substantial problems that exist in the game now without having to worry about situations like that. <div></div>

[Catodon]

Why not just set up system for ring event mobs like this:When a mob in a ring event is charmed, it initially counts as still 'active' if say the coercer wants to use the ring event mob to kill its buddies (ring event won't start if the coercer doesn't release charm during this period).  If the coercer leaves the vicinity (50 meters in any direction, say) or keeps the mob charmed longer than 5 minutes, a flag is set and that mob (or whatever other mob can pop in its spot) repops in the ring event 1 minute later.  After the repop flag is set, if the coercer loses or releases the mob, it will hang around for a short while (long enough to recharm if the coercer survives) then depop on its way back to its original position so you don't get extra monsters hanging around the ring spot.It's still possible to break an event temporarily this way, or use ring event mobs to control/kill the ring, but it would be guaranteed to reset within 10 minutes of a mob being charmed (but never in such a way that you could get the named or whatever to spawn without killing anything).<div></div>

[Chrysostom]

<P>There is already some mechanisms in the game to handle this.  If you charm a creature out of an encounter it will eventually reset.  When that happens currently the coercers pet simply disapears.  There is also code for ring events which causes them to reset after a period of time on failure.</P> <P> SOOO... what you do is make it so that if the only remaining creatures are charmed, then start that failure timer. If the last creature is killed, consider the encounter done and give the guy his cookie.  If the failure times gets to zero then reset the encounter and the coercers pet will poof and no harm will be done. (except probably a dead coercer if he was fighting.)  Problem solved and most the code is already in the game.</P><p>Message Edited by Chrysostom on <span class=date_text>08-02-2006</span> <span class=time_text>01:47 AM</span>

[Wrapye]

<div><blockquote><hr>Chrysostom wrote:<div></div> <div></div><p> SOOO... what you do is make it so that if the only remaining creatures are charmed, then start that failure timer. If the last creature is killed, consider the encounter done and give the guy his cookie.  If the failure times gets to zero then reset the encounter and the coercers pet will poof and no harm will be done. (except probably a dead coercer if he was fighting.)  Problem solved and most the code is already in the game.</p><hr></blockquote>They'll just get a bunch of bug reports from coercers about pets disappearing.  Explaining that it is working as designed will not go over well.I'm tempted to say one option is to somehow denote on the mob's label that it is part of a ring event.  That would prevent accidental charming of a mob that breaks the event.  However, there are those who will mess with events because they can, and charm the mobs because they are part of a ring event.  For that, there is /petition and /report of someone intentionally interfering with an event.The bigger issue, from the developer point of view, is that it would announce that the mobs were part of a ring event, which the devs would like to be kept as something that should be discovered, not just sitting out there saying that killing those mobs will lead to something special.Another alternative is return it to the way it was, where a mob that died while charmed still counted towards quest credit/meeting conditions of an event.  Don't give XP for the death, if that is possible to separate out.I really think that there are a lot of things that can bug ring events.  Charming mobs is one of them, but once the coercer population learns that certain mobs are associated with a ring event, they will tend to not charm them.  They want to do the ring events too, and don't want to mess up their own chances at getting something nice/advancing a quest.  My bet is when they make the mobs uncharmable, the ring events will be broken nearly as often, if not as often, as before.  In that event, they won't make the mobs charmable again, though  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[Magic]

<P>Why must we have ring events in the first place?  If they didn't exist, my Coercer would probably be able to charm everything because it wouldn't have a negative effect, at least at first thought.</P> <P>Could we have them changed into instanced linear events instead?  By that I mean each set of mobs be in different parts of a tunnel rather than spawn after a previous set is killed.  The tunnel would have only one entrance.  The mobs at the deepest end of the tunnel would be the final set.  The mobs at the opening of the tunnel would be the first set.  You could not reach the inner sets without first dealing with the sets before them.  That way you still get the progression from first to last set.  It wouldn't be a ring and so Coercers wouldn't disrupt the progression.  The final room would have a teleporter to pop you back outside so that you didn't need to go through all of the previous mobs to get out, unless you wanted to.</P> <P>How does everyone feel about this idea?  Would it work or not?</P>

[Norrsken]

Not more instances... <div></div>

[Magic]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> roxer2b wrote:<BR>Not more instances...<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>What's wrong with having more instances?  I prefer them!<BR>

[Kine]

<div><blockquote><hr>Aljola wrote:<div></div> <p>Why must we have ring events in the first place?  If they didn't exist, my Coercer would probably be able to charm everything because it wouldn't have a negative effect, at least at first thought.</p> <p>Could we have them changed into instanced linear events instead?  By that I mean each set of mobs be in different parts of a tunnel rather than spawn after a previous set is killed.  The tunnel would have only one entrance.  The mobs at the deepest end of the tunnel would be the final set.  The mobs at the opening of the tunnel would be the first set.  You could not reach the inner sets without first dealing with the sets before them.  That way you still get the progression from first to last set.  It wouldn't be a ring and so Coercers wouldn't disrupt the progression.  The final room would have a teleporter to pop you back outside so that you didn't need to go through all of the previous mobs to get out, unless you wanted to.</p> <p>How does everyone feel about this idea?  Would it work or not?</p><hr></blockquote>Yuck! Doesnt this seem kinda drastic when all they have to do is make ring event mobs non-charmable. There will still be PLENTY of other mobs that can be charmed! Its not like a huge percentage of the creatures out there are part of a ring event.</div>

[Pins]

<blockquote><hr>Aljola wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> roxer2b wrote:<BR>Not more instances...<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>What's wrong with having more instances?  I prefer them!<BR><hr></blockquote> It takes out interaction between people, makes it more of a single player/group game than a MMO.

[Wrapye]

<div><blockquote><hr>Kinen1 wrote:<div>Yuck! Doesnt this seem kinda drastic when all they have to do is make ring event mobs non-charmable. There will still be PLENTY of other mobs that can be charmed! Its not like a huge percentage of the creatures out there are part of a ring event.</div><hr></blockquote>And you can tell which ones those are..... how?  There's no tag that says 'ring event'.One of the really frustrating things about being a coercer is when you try to charm a mob, and are told you can't.  Maybe there is a good reason why that mob isn't charmable, but maybe it is a bug.  There have been already a number of mobs in the game that were incorrectly coded as non-charmable when there was no intention of making them so.  So how would a player know?  Coercers could continually /bug the mobs, which doesn't sounds particularly productive.The better thing to do is code ring events so that charming a mob (1) doesn't break the event and (2) doesn't allow exploiting the event.</div>

[Kine]

<div><blockquote><hr>sacremon wrote:<div><blockquote><hr>Kinen1 wrote:<div>Yuck! Doesnt this seem kinda drastic when all they have to do is make ring event mobs non-charmable. There will still be PLENTY of other mobs that can be charmed! Its not like a huge percentage of the creatures out there are part of a ring event.</div><hr></blockquote>And you can tell which ones those are..... how?  There's no tag that says 'ring event'.One of the really frustrating things about being a coercer is when you try to charm a mob, and are told you can't.  Maybe there is a good reason why that mob isn't charmable, but maybe it is a bug.  There have been already a number of mobs in the game that were incorrectly coded as non-charmable when there was no intention of making them so.  So how would a player know?  Coercers could continually /bug the mobs, which doesn't sounds particularly productive.</div><hr></blockquote>How often do you run across non-charmable mobs? What % would you say? I am not asking this to be a wiseass, since I dont play a coercer, I dont know. Also how many examples can you think of where these were actually bugs and were changed to charmable?If they could find a solution that doesnt involve removing ring events and installing a massive tunnel system throughout Norrath that is great...there were a few logical options posted in this thread. From a realistic standpoint, you are most-likely going to end up with uncharmable mobs. Really, I dont think this unreasonable either. I dont think every mob in the game should be charmable. It was the same way in eq1. If you find a mob that is uncharmable cant you assume that is either part of a ring event or meant to be charm resistant and just charm a different one?</div>

[Kine]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>sacremon wrote:<div><blockquote><hr>Kinen1 wrote:<div>Yuck! Doesnt this seem kinda drastic when all they have to do is make ring event mobs non-charmable. There will still be PLENTY of other mobs that can be charmed! Its not like a huge percentage of the creatures out there are part of a ring event.</div><hr></blockquote>And you can tell which ones those are..... how?  There's no tag that says 'ring event'.One of the really frustrating things about being a coercer is when you try to charm a mob, and are told you can't.  Maybe there is a good reason why that mob isn't charmable, but maybe it is a bug.  There have been already a number of mobs in the game that were incorrectly coded as non-charmable when there was no intention of making them so.  So how would a player know?  Coercers could continually /bug the mobs, which doesn't sounds particularly productive.</div><hr></blockquote>How often do you run across non-charmable mobs? What % would you say? I am not asking this to be a wiseass, since I dont play a coercer, I dont know. Also how many examples can you think of where these were actually bugs and were changed to charmable?If they could find a solution that doesnt involve removing ring events and installing a massive tunnel system throughout Norrath that is great...there were a few logical options posted in this thread. From a realistic standpoint, you are most-likely going to end up with uncharmable mobs. Really, I dont think this unreasonable either. I dont think every mob in the game should be charmable. It was the same way in eq1. If you find a mob that is uncharmable cant you assume that is either part of a ring event or meant to be charm resistant and just charm a different one?</div>

[Magic]

<P>My Coercer should be allowed to charm any mob within its level range.  It's one thing to fizzle when trying to charm, but it's quite another to be told that you cannot charm that mob.  I see no point in being a Coercer if I can't coerce my mobs of choice.</P> <P>I have all 6 mage classes on the same server so I know something about each of them.  My three pet classes have loyal pets who will remain by their sides for days without attacking their owners.  Each pet is strong and can solo most solo blues.  My Coercer is at a disadvantage here.  Charms only last 5-6 minutes at most if they're not broken before the timer runs out.  The pets become instantly hostile when charm breaks and they attack the Coercer.  Charmed mobs seem weaker than they were before the charm.  I know this is due to my spell quality, since I have adept 1 charm.</P> <P>It's not about how many mobs I can charm out of the entire population.  It's about which good quality mobs that I can charm.  On one of the starter islands is Bladefin.  I can't charm that mob.  I would love to charm it and use it to clear the bay.  Anything that I can charm there can't stand up to Bladefin.  That's why I want Bladefin as my pet.  The same applies to Muck Raker in Sunken City, which is another uncharmable mob.  In The Graveyard there are graverobbers which are uncharmable.  The list goes on.  I don't think that these mobs are part of a ring event, but if they are, at least label them as such.</P> <P>So, in my opinion, if ring events are preventing my Coercer from being a Coercer, then I want to see ring events eliminated or fixed.  Let me charm every mob as I so choose.</P>

[Wrapye]

<div><blockquote><hr>Kinen1 wrote:<div></div><div><blockquote></blockquote>How often do you run across non-charmable mobs? What % would you say? I am not asking this to be a wiseass, since I dont play a coercer, I dont know. Also how many examples can you think of where these were actually bugs and were changed to charmable?If they could find a solution that doesnt involve removing ring events and installing a massive tunnel system throughout Norrath that is great...there were a few logical options posted in this thread. From a realistic standpoint, you are most-likely going to end up with uncharmable mobs. Really, I dont think this unreasonable either. I dont think every mob in the game should be charmable. It was the same way in eq1. If you find a mob that is uncharmable cant you assume that is either part of a ring event or meant to be charm resistant and just charm a different one?</div><hr></blockquote>Depends on the zone.  Sinking Sands has an inordinate number of them, some clearly having nothing to do with ring events or quests (the pounders come to mind).  There are others I can think of in Zek, EL and Lavastorm off the top of my head.  None that have ring events associated with them.They have used 'non-charmable' as a fix for problems in the past that have nothing to do with ring events.  The plants in TT can one shot the insects, and were popular mobs for coercers to charm when doing the tasty basket quests.  Rather than fix the damage those mobs did, they made them uncharmable.  There are non-named mobs that are in short supply for some quests - those mobs are often uncharmable.  Now numerous ring event mobs are being made uncharmable.Realize that the ability to charm a mob is the class-defining ability of the coercer.  Can you imagine if there were several mobs in each zone of the game that could not be taunted?  Could not be attacked via positional attacks?  Immune to fire or poison?  Effects that aren't curable?  I'm talking about normal mobs, not epics, not nameds.  Even see invis mobs can be attacked from stealth by assassins, provided someone else has the aggro.  It is singling out the coercer and saying 'You cannot use your prime ability against these mobs.  Ever'.</div>

[Kine]

<P>The OP is right, this is currently a huge problem. Nothing is quite as maddening as getting stuck on a quest or in an adventure because of a bug and not being able to do anything about it until after a server reset...if you are lucky enough to get back to it before it is broken again. I would love to see a fix that doesnt take any of the fun factor away from coercers. Again, I think there were alot of good suggestions to fix this,</P> <P>However, I would have to disagree that any non-named mob should be fair game for being charmed. Some mobs, the plants in TT as a case in point in that particular situation, are just too powerful as charmed pets. If they have to nerf the mob down to allow it to be a non-overpowering pet, then what is the point in insisting on charming it? Just run and grab a different pet and come back. Just because you consider charm to be class-defining doesnt mean it should be infallible. Even if you cant charm the beast, you can still mez it, stun it, debuff it etc. Charm may be what gives the coercer its particular flavor compared to an illusionist, but you are still primarily a crowd control class, not a pet class. You get mez, very nice stat/dps/power regen buffs for your allies and debuffs versus hostiles. My point earlier was that yes, tagging them uncharmable is an easy fix, but I dont see that it is a nerf to coercers.</P> <P>The comparison to taunt I also think is invalid. Taunt isnt a class-defining ability, it is an archetype ability. There are mobs out there that resist taunts very well due to high mental resists. I am a guardian so I rely on taunt for agro control. These are the types of mobs that are better tanked by fighter classes that rely heavily on dps to generate agro like brawler classes and berserkers. Can I still contribute to my group when fighting it even if I cant really hold agro well in that situation? Yes. Just like you can still contribute to a fight versus a non-charmable mob. Until recently guardians didnt even really have a functional class-defining ability. I guess now I would say our tower of stone skill for pulls, our stone sphere for emergency group damage absorption and reinforcement for multi-encounter agro control are class-defining, but they are all very situational and on longish timers so they cant be used on demand on every encounter even if I wanted to.</P> <P>Aljola- iI hope you were joking when you said you should be able to charm any mob including nameds so you can clear out an area! LOL</P>

[Oakum]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sacremon wrote:<BR> <DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kinen1 wrote:<BR> <DIV>Realize that the ability to charm a mob is the class-defining ability of the coercer.  Can you imagine if there were several mobs in each zone of the game that could not be taunted?  Could not be attacked via positional attacks?  Immune to fire or poison?  Effects that aren't curable?  I'm talking about normal mobs, not epics, not nameds.  Even see invis mobs can be attacked from stealth by assassins, provided someone else has the aggro.  It is singling out the coercer and saying 'You cannot use your prime ability against these mobs.  Ever'.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>But you can, can you not. You charm a DIFFERENT mob and use it to attack the mob thats not charmable and between your pet and your debuffs and damage spells, you kill it. That, to me at least, seems like you would be using your primary abilities against that mob. </P> <P>I am not a coercer though, maybe charming a mob to attack another mob is not their primary class defining ability. <BR></P>

[Magic]

I hope that you're sitting down because this is a long reply.<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> Kinen1 wrote:  The OP is right, this is currently a huge problem. Nothing is quite as maddening as getting stuck on a quest or in an adventure because of a bug and not being able to do anything about it until after a server reset...if you are lucky enough to get back to it before it is broken again. I would love to see a fix that doesnt take any of the fun factor away from coercers. Again, I think there were alot of good suggestions to fix this, <HR> <P></P> <P>I agree that quests and ring events should be made so that they can be done.  I wouldn't want to wait for a server reset to fix a problem.  But I don't want to limit my charming ability in order to do this.</P> <P> <HR> Kinen1 wrote:  However, I would have to disagree that any non-named mob should be fair game for being charmed. Some mobs, the plants in TT as a case in point in that particular situation, are just too powerful as charmed pets. If they have to nerf the mob down to allow it to be a non-overpowering pet, then what is the point in insisting on charming it? Just run and grab a different pet and come back. Just because you consider charm to be class-defining doesnt mean it should be infallible. Even if you cant charm the beast, you can still mez it, stun it, debuff it etc. Charm may be what gives the coercer its particular flavor compared to an illusionist, but you are still primarily a crowd control class, not a pet class. You get mez, very nice stat/dps/power regen buffs for your allies and debuffs versus hostiles. My point earlier was that yes, tagging them uncharmable is an easy fix, but I dont see that it is a nerf to coercers. <HR> <P></P> <P>I'm sorry that you feel that way, but I solo all the time and so I NEED my pets.  The more powerful, the better.  You seem to be talking from a grouping perspective.  I have no use for mez or stun in my solo technique.  I can't get XP from using those.</P> <P>Over-powered?  It's bad enough that my pets are already "nerfed."  My charmed pets are not as powerful as they where before they were charmed.  A high orange fighter pet can't kill a low yellow fighter mob without my help, for example.  In my opinion, ALL mobs should be charmable, regardless of how resistant they are to it.  I can't even charm a gray Master at Arms Venquist in Sunken City.  Something's not right about that.</P> <P>Infallible?  Pets can break charm by surprise at any time.  That's a risk to take because a red-con pet will kill you in a moment after charm breaks.  And mez won't usually work because you die before you're done casting it, at least at my current level if I stand too near my pet.</P> <P>Go somewhere else to grab a charmable pet to kill my target?  Not a very good idea in some places.  For example, in The Ruins there are barricades with the Overlord's guards all around.  These idiots will ignore mobs patrolling amongst them on the Overlord's side of the barriers.  However, if you want the guards to kill a mob while it is near one of the Overlord's guards, the sure-fire way to do that is to charm the mob.  Once your charm takes hold, a guard will immediately attack your pet, and then kill you after it dies or after you dismiss it.</P> <P>We are a crowd control AND pet class, similar to an Illusionist and yet different.</P> <P>I think that charm is the best method of pulling in the industry.  If it succeeds, the mob merrily leaves its post and comes trotting over to me while passing its aggro bretheren.  If charm fails, I anger that mob and its nearby bretheren.  Once my pet reaches my group, I dismiss it so that the group can kill it.  I die but it was for the good of my group.  If the mob is uncharmable, there goes my special pull.  Give me charmable mobs or give me death!</P> <P> <HR> Kinen1 wrote:  Aljola- iI hope you were joking when you said you should be able to charm any mob including nameds so you can clear out an area! LOL<BR> <HR> <P></P> <P>Funny thing that you said that.  I was not joking.  In The Ruins, I charm the 14 ^^^ heroic orc warrior patrolling near the pawns.  I use it to kill the level 9-10 orc pawns.  However, I rarely survive those skirmishes because my pet usually breaks charm before the 8 minute timer runs out.  I die so quickly that I no longer bother trying to run anymore.  At least now I have the "Hunter Of Orcs" title and have finished the Orc Mastery quest from the Crossroads.</P></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Kine]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Aljola wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Over-powered?  It's bad enough that my pets are already "nerfed."  My charmed pets are not as powerful as they where before they were charmed.  A high orange fighter pet can't kill a low yellow fighter mob without my help, for example.  In my opinion, ALL mobs should be charmable, regardless of how resistant they are to it.  I can't even charm a gray Master at Arms Venquist in Sunken City.  Something's not right about that.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>They aren't nerfed. You are not a dps pet class, you are a crowd control class. You shouldnt be expecting a conjy or necro strength pet. </FONT></P> <P>Go somewhere else to grab a charmable pet to kill my target?  Not a very good idea in some places.  For example, in The Ruins there are barricades with the Overlord's guards all around.  These idiots will ignore mobs patrolling amongst them on the Overlord's side of the barriers.  However, if you want the guards to kill a mob while it is near one of the Overlord's guards, the sure-fire way to do that is to charm the mob.  Once your charm takes hold, a guard will immediately attack your pet, and then kill you after it dies or after you dismiss it.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Then you need to adapt your tactics in spots like these.  I would like to be able to fight every mob in offensive stance so things go quicker, but ya know what..I cant.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#ffffff>We are a crowd control AND</FONT> pet class, similar to an Illusionist and yet different.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>But you are not a dps class, just like I, as a guardian am not . You cant expect to solo as efficiently or in the same way as a conjy.</FONT></P> <P>I think that charm is the best method of pulling in the industry.  If it succeeds, the mob merrily leaves its post and comes trotting over to me while passing its aggro bretheren.  If charm fails, I anger that mob and its nearby bretheren.  Once my pet reaches my group, I dismiss it so that the group can kill it.  I die but it was for the good of my group.  If the mob is uncharmable, there goes my special pull.  Give me charmable mobs or give me death!</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>Why should you be able to use the same tactic in every situation? There are many things that EVERY class can do in some situations and not others.</FONT></P> <P> <HR> Kinen1 wrote:  Aljola- iI hope you were joking when you said you should be able to charm any mob including nameds so you can clear out an area! LOL<BR> <HR> <P></P> <P>Funny thing that you said that.  I was not joking.  In The Ruins, I charm the 14 ^^^ heroic orc warrior patrolling near the pawns.  I use it to kill the level 9-10 orc pawns.  However, I rarely survive those skirmishes because my pet usually breaks charm before the 8 minute timer runs out.  I die so quickly that I no longer bother trying to run anymore.  At least now I have the "Hunter Of Orcs" title and have finished the Orc Mastery quest from the Crossroads.</P> <P><FONT color=#ffff00>It is nice when you can find a good pet like that..although as you mention it may sometimes have its downside, which is exactly as it should be. In your previous post you were complaining about not being able to charm named mobs...that is just funny. Cant you see how overpowered that would be? Again coercers really shine in a group. You mentioned you like to solo...but it seems like several other classes, including mine, that is just not the strength of coercers. Enjoy the fact that different situations require different approaches. If that wasn't the case, this game would be very boring and mindless.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV>

[Magic]

<P>I understand your point of view, Kinen1, because I have a Guardian on live.  </P> <P>If we're going to keep making more mobs uncharmable, I'd like to see some mobs made immune to melee, some immune to taunts, some immune to debuffs, some immune to rear/flank attacks, and so forth, to even the playing field for ALL classes.  I am being serious about this.</P> <P>So I stand by my opinion to fix ring events so that Coercers can charm mobs in them without ruining the event.</P>

[Soldancer]

-<p>Message Edited by Soldancer on <span class=date_text>08-25-2006</span> <span class=time_text>08:23 PM</span>

[Randell44]

I see no real problems with make important mobs uncharmable.  Whether they be quest related and scarce, or part of a ring event, or plain unbalanced (though I'd prefer they just fix the unbalance).What bothers me is the down scaling of pets combined with the sometimes unreliable nature of charm. I say either make charm last a flat 6 minutes with no chance to resist before that OR stop the sclaing of mobs.  If I choose to charm an oj or red or a ^, ^^, or ^^^ I am taking a large risk currently, and the rewards for that should be there.  Currently I might as well charm a blue vvv.  I mean cmon, I know that in the short term a coercer could handle something above it's lvl, but in the long term that coercer is gonna bite the dust repeatedly.Course then they would prolly make all ^,^^,^^^ uncharmable :/.<div></div>

[Dragoneyed123]

The problem is that most people have no clue what a coercer does and how any of their spells work.  Lets say I charm a lvl 55^^^, when the said mob is charmed it is downsized to a normal lvl 55 no up'ed mob.  Thus it can get killed by another lvl 55^^^ in roughly 4-5 hits, and stands no chance of meleeing that lvl 55^^^ understandable.  Now Lets talk about a lvl 55 bush mob in TT, say for instance we charm it,  go to a kill a fly and one shot it.  First off, its an equal lvl mob as the other insects, the mob should NOT even have the ability to one shot that insect, guess what, its using that same attack against adventurers.  Second off, when I was playing a guardian I had the damnest time soloing these at equal lvl because it had that massive hit. So instead of lowering that power hit, they made them uncharmable.  My main toon is a coercer, lvl 70... going through the lvls my main form of xp was soloing due to to lack of finding groups through the lower lvl's even up through the 60's so CHARM was my main form of soloing.  To make creatures uncharmable is a smack in the face to the coercer, Named are one thing, those should not be charmed...  Ring events should be charmable, lets say I'm duoing with someone, there are four mobs in the initial stage of the ring even, the coercer is crowd control, one way to control crowd is to charm a mob and use it against its allies!   WHY should this bug the encounter? Knowing some of programming and how game mechanics are set up, it wouldn't be that hard to set it up to where it WON"T bug the encounter.  True there are other mobs to charm and use as pets right next to the ring events, but we are set up as crowd control and we should be able to use our abilities to their fullest.  <div></div>

[Magic]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <P> <HR> Dragoneyed123 wrote:<BR>/snip <P></P> <P>To make creatures uncharmable is a smack in the face to the coercer, Named are one thing, those should not be charmed...</P> <P>/snip<BR> <HR> <P></P></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I totally agree with everything that you said except about the nameds.  But it's great to hear from another Coercer, especially one who is at level 70.  It is truly a smack in the face to have mobs immune to charm.  If they keep this up, I'm going to use my Coercer strictly for crafting.</P> <P>Here's an alternative to making mobs uncharmable.  Make all mobs be considered dead at the moment of charm success so that another one like it, or a PH, can respawn at the original location after the respawn timer ends.  This should apply to all current uncharmable mobs and not to any mobs that we can charm now.  If the charm is resisted, the respawn timer doesn't start.  If a successful charm breaks before the respawn time is up, the mob will return to its original location as if nothing ever happened.  If the charm is active when the next one respawns, the pet despawns even if engaged in battle.  This avoids having clones.</P> <P>As a penalty, make the charmed mob have no chance of dropping a chest until charm breaks, the encounter is disengaged, and the mob returns to its original location with full health.</P>

[markdevox]

<DIV>This is probably why the Sul Dal writs under the Eye of Anuk get bugged and stop spawning.  Very irritating.</DIV>

[Soldancer]

From update notes:- Creatures that are part of ring events in Palace of the Awakened should no longer be charmable. This is to prevent the events from failing to progress correctly.That's simply an impudence!Snake-event, both dragon-events, advisor-event - they are all now "forbidden" for coercers.It's the same like to say to all wizards:All those mobs are now unrootable.Or like to say to all tanks:All those mobs are now untauntableDevs use coercers as scapegoats for their disabilty to solve problems that were never related to charms. There were never posts like "We can't do dragon events", "We can't do advisor-event". All posts were related to snake-event with it's 9 h respawn and the reason for this were not coercers with 9 h long charmed pets - absolutely not!A simple and fair solution would be e.g. to depop a charmed ring-event-mob after it's respawn time.<p>Message Edited by Soldancer on <span class=date_text>09-05-2006</span> <span class=time_text>12:16 AM</span>

[electricninjasex]

Straightforward fix IMO.1. Remove the charmed enemy from the encounter as a kill.2. Turn the charmed mob into its own solo encounter separate from the ring event encounter.Am I wrong?<div></div>

[Wrapye]

And if it is found that the ring events (sorry, dynamic camps) are bugging just as often as they were before the mobs were made uncharmable, what do you think the odds are of the change being reversed?  About the same as winning my state's lottery, I suspect.<div></div>

[Jida]

<div><blockquote><hr>Soldancer wrote:From update notes:- Creatures that are part of ring events in Palace of the Awakened should no longer be charmable. This is to prevent the events from failing to progress correctly.That's simply an impudence!Snake-event, both dragon-events, advisor-event - they are all now "forbidden" for coercers.It's the same like to say to all wizards:All those mobs are now unrootable.Or like to say to all tanks:All those mobs are now untauntableDevs use coercers as scapegoats for their disabilty to solve problems that were never related to charms. There were never posts like "We can't do dragon events", "We can't do advisor-event". All posts were related to snake-event with it's 9 h respawn and the reason for this were not coercers with 9 h long charmed pets - absolutely not!A simple and fair solution would be e.g. to depop a charmed ring-event-mob after it's respawn time.<p>Message Edited by Soldancer on <span class="date_text">09-05-2006</span> <span class="time_text">12:16 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Some of those mobs are unrootable already</div>