Crowd Control/Heroic Surge Feedback

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

DDO at least has struck some kind of balance, where everyone gets to participate meaningfully

LOL. You have reinforced my point with reference to 3.5 rules, which is the set of rules this game was designed from. DPS needed the Magic world. Its a simple matter of fact. Magic doesnt stop at buffing.

As far as the balance issue, sorry, D&D was never supposed to be perfectly balanced. THAT is why there was always a need for PARTIES. Keeping a level of imbalance REQUIRES the need to work together to accomplish a common goal.

If EVERYTHING IS BALANCED, there'd be no NEED for teamwork. Limited need for specialties. Limited need for tactics. It would be a very 2-D world. And it would not be D&D.

In the current state of DDO, CC builds can NOT "participate meaningfully" in Amrath level and epic level content with blanket immunities and the nerfing of the CC playstyle (messing with heroic surge in current format, as well as under-clocking fascinate and other spell durations) successfully spreads this disadvantage into "non-end game content."

[Junts]

Or we could just all be arcanes, like in module 5. I bet all those fighters who couldn't get groups cause they were totally irrelevant had so much fun.

[sephiroth1084]

LOL. You have reinforced my point with reference to 3.5 rules, which is the set of rules this game was designed from. DPS needed the Magic world. Its a simple matter of fact. Magic doesnt stop at buffing.

As far as the balance issue, sorry, D&D was never supposed to be perfectly balanced. THAT is why there was always a need for PARTIES. Keeping a level of imbalance REQUIRES the need to work together to accomplish a common goal.

If EVERYTHING IS BALANCED, there'd be no NEED for teamwork. And it would not be D&D.

In the current state of DDO CC builds can NOT "participate meaningfully" in Amrath level and epic level content with blanket immunities and the nerfing of the CC playstyle

You need to brush up on your reading comprehension.

-You quoted the Eberron source book as saying that magic is an integral part of the world. I mentioned that we use magic all the time in DDO, so there is no discrepancy there.

-You say you want DDO to follow PnP's emphasis on magic, but I pointed out that at high levels magic users completely overshadow melees, even obviate the need for them.

I didn't say that I wanted perfect balance and harmony...in fact, I point out that there isn't, but that the usefulness of each character type teeters back and forth, emphasizing one play style then another.

-You say that we form parties to deal with the imbalance, but I pointed out that forming a group didn't do anything. You could have a fighter, rogue, wizard and cleric, and when it came time to fight the BBEG, the rogue and fighter would hit the thing for maybe 1/5 of its HP if they were REALLY munchkined out, then the wizard or cleric would just defeat the monster. They had no need for the fighter or rogue.

Hell, I've read accounts of a wizard soloing adventures in PnP without even being present! THAT is the power of magic in PnP, and I for one am glad that DDO has made an effort to distance itself from that craziness a little bit.

Finally, CC builds are in no way useless, even in Amrath. I run a predominantly CC caster, and I'm able to help quite a bit. Web, Sleet Storm, Mass Hold Monster, Energy Drain + whatever, Irresistible Dance, Acid Fog... Is it tough? Sure, but then The Vale was a cakewalk for casters. I'd like it if it were a little bit less punishing on caster sin Amrath, but if I want to go kick some ass in high level content, I can take my wizard into the Mindsunder and all but solo it on elite. And when I get my WF Wizard up to that level, I expect that I shall be able to solo it on elite.

So again, what did you post have to do with the discussion at hand?

I heartily suggest enrolling in Reading Comprehension 101, as being able to understand what people are saying is an important skill.

[Ponza69]

I must admit I do not understand Boro and Junts position. I am pretty sure this is because I am a new player and have never seen content above the vale. (and not much in the vale itself up to this point).

I am not a cutting edge player. I enjoy soloing / duoing content that is several levels below my current level. Why? Because it is a challenge for me to do that. I could not do that at level.

I still do sands runs. What is the challenge there? There always is a challenge you just have to find one. Whether it be time or how many of these can I kill or rather how many can I not kill and still get the chest is still a challenge. I am true nuetral as a bard maybe in a RP mood I value life - even those badies don't all deserve to die.

If the issue is content in quest that become trivial then please address the content issues. Broad sweeping changes may or may not have an effect on the rest of the population but I think it is safe to say that what is being proposed here by the cutting edge players is in no way balanced when looking at the classes and sub classes. What is the impact the the Virt as opposed to the wizard / sorc / warchanter. Who takes the biggest hit? Is mellee or rogue impacted directly?

[SquelchHU]

I'm staying out of the forum war, I have enough of my own to fight. However...

Stop talking about normal D&D. There it isn't that big a deal if spells only have a 25% chance to land, or even lower than that because even if it takes four or more castings to make one land either by spell spam or by an enervation/sod one two punch, as soon as one does the fight is over. In fact you have to only use monsters with high saves to have any chance of a > 1 round combat, and even then with needing 4+ spells a combat you can do your 4 fights a day and still have the vast majority of your spell power left.

Try the same thing in DDO and you will run out of power very quickly because there's far more mobs.

Now it's nice that non casters can participate in DDO due to much higher personal power + much lower enemy intelligence, but at the same time blanket immunities and such give casters the shaft, particularly in terms of crowd control.

This is a really narrow game, and it is getting more narrow.

Right now there's 3 bard specs. One is pointless because everything at high levels is immune to them, with the apparent exception of epic mobs that even many powergamers don't like fighting. One while not quite pointless is obviously inferior because it focuses on casting. One is melee DPS.

It would be nice if the direction you took your bard depended on what you actually wanted to do, instead of the only sensible option being make a warchanter and swing your weapon(s) around like everyone else.

Wizards are better at CC than Sorcerers due to higher DCs. Is that making it a fair trade off instead of Wizard < Sorcerer? No, because CC is getting the shaft. Narrow characters for narrow games.

Just how bad is this narrowness?

Powergamers are this game's target audience. Ask me if you don't know why. Yet at the same time when I attempted to get a group of powergamers to start playing this game their responses were along these lines:

It's just boring hack and slash.
The game is too narrow to be enjoyable.
If I wanted a hack and slash DPS fest I would go play Diablo. Not even Diablo 2, but the original Diablo.

There were also complaints about repeating the same narrow series of quests over and over (part few quests being viable running options, part player reaction to this by sticking to what works) and complaints about people not wanting them to do anything unless they had already done it many times (player choice).

I don't know about you, but I find it positively chilling that DDO is having any difficulty whatsoever, much less that much difficulty in attracting its target audience. After all any trouble they have getting the people their game is made for to stick around they will see even more of when attempting to attract players outside of that niche.

Yes a lot of new people are joining. How long are they staying? Based on both my attempt to get more players into DDO (small scale) and observing low, mid, and high level areas before and after the answer is 'not that many'. There's a lot more people around in the starter area, harbor, and market but once you start getting to GH, the numbers are about the same or perhaps slightly higher.

Low retention rates are bad, particularly for a F2P model not only because it means not that many are sticking around to play but because it also means a lot more negative press.

And all this ties right back around to the game being overly narrow and only becoming more so.

Don't help this along by nerfing CC.

[Borror0]

Of course only YOU have credibility.

No. I never claimed that. There are several clever posters on these forums that I value their opinion greatly because they make good, solid points. Junts and Angelus_dead, in particular, have changed my perspective on several issues; I trust MrCow's facts more than I trust my own perception; and Thanimal always catches my attention when he posts builds. Simply because I do not value what you say does not mean I only care about myself.

[zealous]

People, how about we get back on discussing alternatives to HS before the thread deteriorates into name calling?
---
Gave that ide about replacing heroic surges with progressively increasing saves some more thought...

An extra "layer" on top of DC and SR in the form of a new improved HS could be used to increase the importance of varied spell use and change static nofail/nosuccess to something more varied.

A suggestion put forth in this thread in various ways is to have heroic surge increase the chance to save in some way. This would transform a higher DC into a longer duration making for an added layer of balancing, this would be good.

How about taking a BAB approach to the issue? Say, give you an incremental increase in your save bonus over time. I have no idea what the numbers would be, just for example let's say 0/0/1/3/5/10/etc.

Additionally, if possible, different mobs could have different progression of save increases for different spells. This could vary according to mob types or randomly.
e.g. minotaur shamen are particularly weak against ottos resistible dance gaining a +0/+0/+1/+2 save progression(common to all shamen) while having a particularly strong HS responce against hypnotism gaining a +10/+20/+30/+40 save progression(common to all minotaurs).

This could be used to remove the problem with FtSing respawning mobs by simply giving mobs supposed to respawn a set low save for an extended period of time and then spiking. I.e. start of at +0 for 30/60s and then spike to +100. Instead of having a removable spell mantle the increased save could persist for some time in order to give a temporary ward against cc.

Applying this to e.g. air elementals you would get knocked down and by the time you got up the chance to get knocked down again would be decreased. Could make it so that if you get knocked down while having the heroic surge +to saves ticking, it just keeps ticking as opposed to being knocked down again. The problem with this being using balance to get up and thus giving incentive to keep balance temporarily low in order to charge up your saves. This could probably be abusable, same as HS, in that you could remove items, to decrease saves, get afflicted by a in reality easy cc to resist to charge up HS, put items back on to boost saves to the sky before engaging the mob where you need the saves.

Optionally this could be tied to feats/enhancements to improve functinality of existing feats/creating new ones, e.g. resilience bumps the save progression/increases the duration of the surge.
...
Some other more wacky ideas:
If the "ladder" could be tied to specific spells you could have some spells initially, or with a time delay, actually decreasing saves for other spells. This would open up for using e.g. hypnotism to make a mob vulnerable to mass hold.
e.g. hypnotism progresses at 0/0/0/-5 to hold and +1 to others/+2 to all/etc.
It could increase incentives to use more varied spells and also increase the amount of attention needed in order to pull it off.
This would also make it possible to make it less abusable by only increasing saves for the spell(s) you're afflicted with.

Something like this could also be used in place of glancing blows; if a player/mob misses a lot, you would get a "ladder" increasing tohit while reducing damage or possibly some other stat like AC or saves.
...
Shouldn't be too computationally expensive, could be somewhat difficult to get right but if implemented in a sane manner it would be easy to change. Starting off with a bare bones system with a conservative and uniform "ladder" across the board would be a way to introduce it. You could then tweak it over time to achieve greater mob variation and in the long run possibly use it to replace immunities.
...
Can't shake the image of how awsum it would be to have a coordinated circle of mages desperately weaving a complex combination of spells to keep harry in check, epic. =P

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

People, how about we get back on discussing alternatives to HS before the thread deteriorates into name calling?

Agreed.

I feel there was no need to address player CC spell durations. No need for mob based Heroic Surge the way its been implemented.

I DO feel dev time spent on finally bringing us druids may have been the better way to spend Subscriber monies.

As for air ellies, simply give them a cooldown between knockdowns. I have no trouble with multiple knockdowns... it IS an AIR elly after all, what ELSE can it do?

As for Flesh to Stone, no need to change. You are being turned or turning something into STONE. The current DDO interpretation is fine.

As for Heroic Surge, why not make it a feat option and tie it to PrEs? Thats how its handled in Dragonlance.

[Gornin]

Spellcasting is grossly overpowered in PnP compared to melee. Nerfing spells was unavoidable, and of course a good decision.

Uh, what does that have to do with what I wrote? I said they were nerfed and why and that I understood. Just because I state a fact doesn't mean I don't understand why it is that way.

To prevent many CC spells from being lackluster, they got something that could be interprated as a buff to make up for that. Mind you, they might not allow the same of creative thinking out of a problem but they are certainly more powerful in-combat spells. In other words, they act differently than they acted in DDO. Saying that it's "further of a nerf" says nothing about their power level. However, the fact that many CC spells have been considered overpowered and have been nerfed before does harm your argument severely.

Just to name a few, Fascinate, Charm Person and Suggestion all got good in-combat buffs compared to their PnP version.

Combat buffs on a charm spell? The logic fails. The spells are not overpowered now and you are recommending that they get nerfed even more. The reason they are either considered nerfed or overpowered is quest design. At this point in the game, CC is only used in very specific scenarios, making it a less desirable option. Less desirable options are not used, that is human nature. If CC is nerfed even more, might as well remove all CC spells and abilities from the game, possibly the bard class also, since no one want them in their party, and you will be blacklisted if you use any charm spell. Then we can watch many leave this game since they can't play the way they like. That is my opinion of course, but I think I have reasonable logic behind it.

I challenge you to show me a video supporting the claim you need three whole minute of Fascinate or more than a minute of Flesh to Stone.

And I challenge you to show me where I said I needed it. Better learn to not put words in people mouths before challenging them. Think I must hit a sensitive spot for you to challenge me. What's wrong? You don't like it when people don't play the game the way you think they should? Get over your self. You are not the arbiter of what is the right way to play this game. Quit trying to shove other MMO designs down our throats, because other MMO's are not DDO, and many of us don't want this game to be as bland as the others.

I can't show a video, because what you ask is not possible due to the already nerfed CC when in a full group. Admittedly, even in a group of 3 or less, it is not needed, but is a viable tactic to lessen the use of resources, even if it takes longer. So why mess with durations if most parties don't need it, or even use it? Leave it alone for those who enjoy the playstyle.

Another reason I can't show you a video is I don't know how, nor do I wish to waste my time to learn to do something I have no desire to do.

That reasoning might be applicable to Suggestion or Charm Person, but not to Fascinate nor Flesh to Stone.

To answer your question, it's acceptable in PnP because there is a DM and because quests cannot be repeated. That's the answer.

In PnP, it's the DM's job to ensure the players are having fun and he can respond to that in real time. Finding a smart way around the encounter is fun. It's like solving a puzzle. If the DM sees a way to let you have fun, he'll let you have fun, adapt and change his plans in a way to ensure the game's still fun.

In DDO, Turbine is the equivalent of the DM but there is no way for them to ensure that you're having a good experience in real time. They can only improve our experience by changing the game. Thing is, if the players are overcoming game mechanics, even if it's by smart play, it impacts their gameplay because it means the quest is not challenging. That's not a problem if they do it once. Finding a smart way around a problem is fun, after all. But, they'll repeat the quests several times and pass to other players. Finding the solution the first time is fun, the the reduced challenge the other times are not. In this case, the fun problem solving is dwarfed by repetition.

That's why.

Gee, thanks for the condescension. Maybe if you would actually read what I wrote instead of cherry picking quotes.

First, I already said I understood why something are changed from PnP, but thanks for the DM lessons. My 30 plus years experience never taught me that.

Second, I wrote a reasonable solution to the above quote about respawns being on a timer. Make CC useful, but also dangerous.

Third, your lecture does not change the fact that some people like to play a certain way, either sometimes or all the time depending on their inclination, and to nerf CC to the point where it is only support for DPS is wrong. CC is barely above that now. Most CC is just used to support DPS as it is, why must we relegate CC all the way to the back of the bus, instead of just the middle where it is now?

Seems to me is that is what you want. Make CC support your style of play, and no others. You make claims to the contrary, but what you write says the opposite.

[KKDragonLord]

Agreed.

I feel there was no need to address CC spell durations. No need for mob based Heroic Surge the way its been implemented.

I DO feel dev time spent on finally bringing us druids may have been the better way to spend Subscriber monies.

As for air ellies, simply give them a cooldown between knockdowns. I have no trouble with multiple knockdowns... it IS an AIR elly after all, what ELSE can it do?

As for Flesh to Stone, no need to change. You are being turned or turning something into STONE. The current DDO interpretation is fine.

As for Heroic Surge, why not make it a feat option and tie it to PrEs. Thats how its handled in Dragonlance.

I agree with most of these. If CC needs to be adjusted, its to make it a viable alternative, not the opposite, and all this discussion about Fascinate might be fascinating but there is more to the game than just one ability of one class.

If Heroic Surge purpose is to be a boon to unexperienced players, or a future fix for PvP, it should be exclusive to the players. It should be an Enhancement line, that new players would likely invest into, and the base class builds would have, but experienced players would probably ignore to get more important stuff.

It shouldnt be the fix for Air Ellies. Air ellies should have alternate forms and the whirlwind should only require 1 save per second (instead of 100). This is the true fix for air ellies, they can't be the scapegoat for a CC nerf that doesn't even fix them properly.

Enemies should use more CC, their whole spellcasting priorities in fact should be optimized, like i said before the casters and their close allies should have long term protective buffs up from the start, they could even activate the short timed ones on themselves when they see the party, with the Contingency spell from pnp.

Actually contingencies have always been the DMs best friend, why dont you use more tools from PnP? It could improve the game tremendously! They change things when we least expect, teleporting bosses out of certain death, raising them back, giving them blanket protections at certain HP values, etc...

Enemy casters are always short lived, but protective spells could change that, and the little time they have, it should be for disabling their enemies and raining down destruction upon their foes.

I even dare to say, give them teleportation, give them flight, give them blink, mirror image, stack energy shields on them, like death armor, fire shield, acid shield, personal blade barriers, all sorts of stuff, you dont even need to give players those, if you are going to house rule, do it for the challenge, do it for the fun, but within the rules, and in a creative way that supports various playstyles.

[Gornin]

Most of the people defending CC in this thread are not cutting edge players. They're players with CC focused builds who's CC builds are utterly dominating in less challenging content like the Vale and Inspired Quarter, where their CC is at near or full effect and more or less wins the quests without any sort of effort at all. Those same characters are frequently incredibly ineffective in Amrath and Epic content, becuase they specialize in something that would trivialize those encounters if allowed to work .. so its not allowed to work.

Wrong. Some people can see past how they play or what they like. And some would like to keep this game as loyal as possible to the rules its based on.

I am not saying that it doesn't need some work, but cutting durations is unfair to other gaming styles. Quest and AI design would go a long way in mitigating some of the problems with CC.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

I agree with most of these.

Not a bad set of ideas, and you didnt take up my entire screen explaining your point.

I actually left one out.

Blanket immunities. They got to go the way of the Dodo Bird. Gone.

cutting durations is unfair to other gaming styles.

Seeing beyond your playstyle was a brilliant comment. For me, it also depends which toon I'm on. When I'm on my CC specced bard and wizard of course I like my CC to be effective. However when I'm on my DPS fighter and I want to dominate kill count, I STILL want the other classes to have fun doing what they are built to do. I dont want to see a bard or a wizard feel useless. Maybe that's just me?

I feel Gornin and KK are talking more like how the majority of the playerbase feels.

This sadly, will get far uglier, if they release update 3 as scheduled. (After waiting almost a whole year for MOD 9, I'd hate to see something like this get rushed and pushed onto the playerbase that is already so widely unpopular.)

[Mjesko]

Excessively long CC is only useful if you start doing stuff that Turbine does not want you to do: forward retreat (running past mob without killing them, aka zerging) and immobilizing mob to overcome respawns. Other than those two exploitive use, there is no way you're going to pass over 1 minute of CC. That's why it's not a problem to reuce those durations and why excessively long CC is not a good way to balance any class.

Hmmm, but the durations of charm and dominate should be long, because these spells are DESIGNED to control a monster for more than one encounter, at least before charm was nerfed...

[Borror0]

Hmmm, but the durations of charm and dominate should be long, because these spells are DESIGNED to control a monster for more than one encounter, at least before charm was nerfed...

The duration of Dominate should be long, as I agreed early in the thread, because it is meant to last several encounters in order to make more powerful to Charm and Suggestion. Charm and Suggestion, however, don't need to be long since, as you allude to, the mobs don't follow you anyway.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Hmmm, but the durations of charm and dominate should be long, because these spells are DESIGNED to control a monster for more than one encounter, at least before charm was nerfed...

Of course, you break those spells/songs in half. If ALL or most CC was changed to last only as long as a monster should last, then all spells that get past monster spell resistance are created equal.. Gone are the 'personalities" of each individual spell. Gone are the descriptions that we've come to known over the years (30 years D&D player here). Gone is the authenticity.

We will never duplicate pen & paper exactly, nor does it even have to be incredibly close. But there needs to be an effort by the Devs to always associate with the 3.5 rules this game was built and promoted upon. Never should it appear to be globally straying from these very same rules.

[Mjesko]

If Heroic Surge purpose is to be a boon to unexperienced players, or a future fix for PvP, it should be exclusive to the players. It should be an Enhancement line, that new players would likely invest into, and the base class builds would have, but experienced players would probably ignore to get more important stuff.

Actually contingencies have always been the DMs best friend, why dont you use more tools from PnP? It could improve the game tremendously! They change things when we least expect, teleporting bosses out of certain death, raising them back, giving them blanket protections at certain HP values, etc...

Enemy casters are always short lived, but protective spells could change that, and the little time they have, it should be for disabling their enemies and raining down destruction upon their foes.

I even dare to say, give them teleportation, give them flight, give them blink, mirror image, stack energy shields on them, like death armor, fire shield, acid shield, personal blade barriers, all sorts of stuff, you dont even need to give players those, if you are going to house rule, do it for the challenge, do it for the fun, but within the rules, and in a creative way that supports various playstyles.

These are very good suggestions to make the game and especially the epic difficulty more challenging without adding blanket immunities and insane hp or saves.

Another step would be to turn off saveguards on higher difficulties, like the HS, or even bring back the death penalty on epic, which bestows 1 negative level, that can be only cured if a player pays perhaps 1,000,000 gold per negative level.

[KKDragonLord]

I agree that they need good CC but they don't need excessively long CC. In fact, excessively long CC is not useful at all if you fight normally.

Excessively long CC is only useful if you start doing stuff that Turbine does not want you to do: forward retreat (running past mob without killing them, aka zerging) and immobilizing mob to overcome respawns. Other than those two exploitive use, there is no way you're going to pass over 1 minute of CC. That's why it's not a problem to reuce those durations and why excessively long CC is not a good way to balance any class.

The truth is that CC is not nearly as important right now as it should be. Extremely long CC included. Crowd Control should be required to complete dificcult quests because it is the only tool that allows parties to survive battles against Overwhelming Odds. When CC isn't relevant, it means that the battle is too easy.

Fascinate is stupidly impossible to resist but only becase it is extremely limited in the fact that any kind of agressive behavior towards the target should break the ability, and in PnP, it only works for as long as the bard keeps playing to the exclusion of all else, in a limited range. This makes changing tactics to avoid breaking it, a necessity. It is true that it shouldnt be exploitable, but the way to deal with that is to devise counter-measures for it, not to nerf it to oblivion.

The natural counter for CC is a whole category of spells that are a part of the combat system. Besides those, preventing exploits can be done creatively in several ways: blocking paths, increasing difficulty in the next encounters, allowing mobs to go to the battle as reinforcements, adding caster spawns that release previously disabled mobs if those are left unattended, Respawns should become Additive New Spawns instead. There are a ton of intelligent alternatives out there.

DPS shouldn't be the "end all be all' of the game, the "one tool that fits all", the "solution to all problems". For some, or even most quests, there should be different encounters that require creative ways of dealing with them. This is why D&D is a group based game.

[Borror0]

[...] and to nerf CC to the point where it is only support for DPS is wrong.

Of course it would be, but my position has never been to do that.

Not only I have asked for them to make CC more effective in this thread - a least a few times - but I have wrote a very long post asking them to do just that a while ago - actually, more than one long post. I had even included this in my list of reasons why I prefer Gwylan's Stand over any end game content since Module 6.0! Many of these posts have been written over a year ago. That's longer than some of you have been playing DDO and longer than most of you have been asking Turbine to make CC viable again.

Of course, that's ignoring the discussions on removing all sorts of immunities or the times I bugged developers about it.

In fact, I have probably wrote more posts asking developers to make CC more effective than any of you have.

Making CC less effective is not and has never been my goal. Hopefully, the above links are enough to make you guys realize that. However, there is a difference between preventing a spell to be overpowered in a specific situation and wanting to make CC less effective. The former is what I'm aiming for.

As Junts said earlier, certain CC spells act in two different ways depending on the situation:

In some cases, they are barely useful because the monsters have too high saves, SR or are immune to the spell. The rest of the time, those spells are overpowered because they either are ridiculously powerful or enable cheesy/exploitative tactics.

That's doubly problematic. If players cannot use CC spells because the monsters, resistances are too high then it prevents a playstyle from being viable because their BMX skills are a bit redundant. But, if you just take away the immunities, high saves and high SR from players, they gain the ability to summon a horde of celestial super beings at will therefore trivializing content that is supposed to be hard or at least somewhat challenging.

Obviously, the ideal is to aim for something in the middle: CC should be always useful and balanced with other playstyle, never overpowered nor underpowered.

Since that is not how it is right now, changes are needed. Unfortunately, it can't only be buffs. After all, there is a reason that monsters cannot be CC'd so easily right now. In a way, CC spells are both underpowered and overpowered at the same time. They are underpowered because it is so hard to land any of them that the effectiveness is usually negligible but they are also overpowered in that, if allowed to be used freely, they can trivialize any content.

For that reason, both nerfs and buffs are required to have a balanced CC playstyle.

This is the logistic behind Junts' and my posts.

In the case of Fascinate, Flesh to Stone and Suggestion, which are the spells most discussed here, a nerf to the duration won't even affect the spells' effectiveness in normal gameplay because the durations are so excessively long. For example, Fascinate lasts over three minutes by level 20 but there is just no good reason to Fascinate a group of mobs for that long unless it's for forward retreat (is zerging) or to exploit a bug in the mob generator.

So, in this case, nerfing those spells' durations won't even have an effect of the effectiveness of CC unless you want to defend the times where it's overpowered. I know that some people enjoy those overpowered uses, heck Junts and I are among those people, but that's different from saying that allowing those tactics is good for the game. Worse, it might even have a negative effect on you as well because it could possibly mean more and more immunities which you probably would despise as much as us.

The only possible category of people that might be affected by this are those playing small groups. However, dungeon scaling weakens the mobs and those players should play on Normal or Casual rather than Hard and Elite so things should balance out. Additionally powergamers have "leftover duration" when killing mobs so that's another balancing factor.

In an earlier post, you seemed to disagree by saying:

It also does not let me solo/small group effectively on my wiz or bard if I can't depend on my CC spells to work.

I took this comment to mean you needed to full duration on Fascinate or Flesh to Stone, which was something that I had an hard time believing. During all my time as a leader of a casual guild on Tharashk in 2007, I never came across a single situation where I needed the whole duration of Fascinate. Ever. And that was back in 2007, when low levels characters were much less powerful than they are now with PrE's, new spells, etc.

However, you just retracted from that comment in your latest post by saying:

even in a group of 3 or less, it is not needed

You then go on to explain how it can still be useful, however, in order to make it less costly which is a fine point but is completely different from saying that a part of the explicitly supported playerbase would be unable to play like they used to. The latter would mean that the spell would become to weak under those situations, but that is not the case. It might become weaker but it will still see some use.

Therefore, we can conclude that reducing the duration of those spells will have a beneficial effect on the game.

Gee, thanks for the condescension.

If you feel the part you quoted was condescending, then I apologize. It was not intended to. Perhaps it was the explanation that felt insulting, because it's fairly basic and obvious stuff but you have to realize I unfortunately cannot read minds. I don't know what you know.

I, however, do know that I have had to explain what I consider fairly basic stuff to people on these forums such as why balance matters or why incentives are important to good gameplay so it's only normal for me to assume that a poster might not know what I judge obvious. I meant to be educative, not condescending. If you knew all that, expected you begin your reply with "I know all that but..." or something of the kind.

[Sirea]

But, you know, I bet your shining personality and ability to awkwardly hit on girl players got you plenty of groups back then. It wasn't crappy for melees at all or anything.

Wanna wrestle?

[redoubt]

That's unrealistic. The exact opposite is actually one of the most important thing to remember when reading feedback:

"Learn to recognize which parts of your game and playerbase aren't important. Your favorite part of the game may be something the playerbase doesn't care about, and there are some players who care about things that it isn't in your best interests to focus on." -Mike Darga

Other than the obvious problem that some audience are mutually exclusive, there is the problem that it's just not possible to do that with finite resources. No matter the amount of resources that you have at hand, there is no way you can add all the features that you might want so you got to decide which to favor. If you don't act this way, bad things happen and bad things are not cool - trust me.

Edit: much of my questions below are answered above in post 721. I had not read that far yet. Good to see at least some progress.

Borro0, slow down, back up and explain to those of us concerned about CC how you are not trying to destroy what many of us consider our favorite caster playstyle. Note, I'm asking you to explain your position again, so no defensive postures please.

Here is why I am asking: What you are saying sounds very arrogant. I don't know who Darga is, nor do I really care. I want the game to be fun. You don't seem to care about anyone elses opinion of fun but your own. You talk a lot and put other people down consistently. Yes, some deserve it, but you come of as incredibly arrogant (yes, again.) So, please, without being condecending or arrogant, explain how I should be taking your comments. Show me that its not just you being arrogant and self centered.