Crowd Control/Heroic Surge Feedback

[Aashrym]

since even on elite/epic the heroic surge timers for mobs are 60-90 seconds, the purpose of this change is not to impact me using irresistable dance, or otto's sphere, or even web to immobilize a mob group

Its to deal with tactics like flesh to stoning all the respawning orthons in tower part 3 because its permanent and they can consequently be ignored foreverafter instead of having them respawn every 30-45 seconds or so. That tactic was so powerful that they had to make stoned orthons randomly die after 30 seconds so that more would spawn ... 3 energy drains to stack on 15 negative levels (for -30 to fort saves) ensured that they would never, ordinarly, save out. It trivializes challenge when you use cc this way.

There's like 4 instances with respawn mechanics of any kind, and none of them is consequential re: fts anymore because they already fixed the raid instance of it. Yeah, I'll pass on having my only solution to an orthon run rampant nerfed into uselessness, thanks.

Judging by both of those comments I think we may have found a way to stop trivializing the challenge.

If your only argument again it is you don't have another option for an Orthon run it looks like a reasonable way to stop said trivialization of the challenge.

Well, maybe anyway. Maybe not unless it ever does get play tested. I would expect that some of our resourceful players will still find a way.

[Junts]

Energy Drain will still lower saving throws. Right now I think it does get over used. Rather than making a change that affects all CC (including energy drained mobs) simply reducing the effectiveness of spammed negative levels might be a better solution.

If we need to spam negative levels in order to play the game that says a lot regarding the inflated saves anyway.

We do, so if you nerf energy drain that bad, we're just never using any spell with a dc ever, so ddo is

wall of fire
polar ray
otto's irresistable dance

maybe web cause it lands so much better than other dc-based spells due to its mechanics

woo hoo 4 spells are your offense!

energy drain is a savior.

[Junts]

Judging by both of those comments I think we may have found a way to stop trivializing the challenge.

If your only argument again it is you don't have another option for an Orthon run it looks like a reasonable way to stop said trivialization of the challenge.

Well, maybe anyway. Maybe not unless it ever does get play tested. I would expect that some of our resourceful players will still find a way.

I think you aren't making the distinction between tod's spam respawning orthons meant to be a hassle, and random hi meet my 50 fort save elite-difficulty trashmob orthon with 12,000 hit points.

I get the impression you have absolutely no DDO endgame experience whatsoever.

[ieatogres]

All current CC spells with the exception of Flesh to Stone have a balanced break time. Flesh to Stone was even given a "balanced" save, considering it should be permanent. To reduce the intervals between saves is to further trivialize the use of Crowd Control when mobs base stats lead to inflated saves. I realize it'll take time, but the developers, in my opinion, need to completely revamp the way they make enemy monsters, as inflated stats recopied and adjusted +/- 2-8 points on other mobs of the same type (gnoll archer/warrior/lieutenant/austere/evincer) will only further damage the situation in future installments of the game. The Inspired Quarter is perfect for being more level appropriate by adding equipment to monsters while also decreasing their base stats, making the path to the Dreaming Dark more linear rather than a huge jump in difficulty meant for well-equipped/tactically understood players.

As far as the stacking of negative levels, that's only another SP sink unless you use scrolls, and that's usually for one mob out of many that you feel needs to be controlled (aka bearded devils, since orthons are pushovers).

For more on improving enemy monsters madfloyd and other relevant developers, refer to my post here

I agree with you on the Inspired Quarter. I believe that have that quest line is pretty well balanced for CC.

Let me get more specific when I say some saves rates need to be increased; Flesh to Stone is the spell that I am really talking about here. I can't think of any other spell that is completely out of line for length of time between saves (given current save levels). Now, if the devs decide to reduce save levels and reduce immunties of the mobs in many quests, we may see some of the time between saves might be too long.

[sephiroth1084]

My viewpoint to mob immunities. I dont think there should be ANY mob immunities added - even temporary ones - as they will always affect CC in some way.

If it even APPEARS that player CC has been further limited, it will stop the building and use of crowd control specialists in the game. And that would make this game more linear than it currently is.

Who's talking about adding immunities?

[ieatogres]

My viewpoint to mob immunities. I dont think there should be ANY mob immunities added - even temporary ones - as they will always affect CC in some way.

I would actually like to see boss immunties changed to something like double or triple saves. That way there is a very small chance of getting through on a boss with a CC spell. Bosses would have to be capped on negative levels though to prevent the cast of numerous energy drains followed by other spells.

[Ranmaru2]

I think you aren't making the distinction between tod's spam respawning orthons meant to be a hassle, and random hi meet my 50 fort save elite-difficulty trashmob orthon with 12,000 hit points..

Actually Jaer I would argue that the Orthons in ToD need to keep spawning like the kobolds in Kobold Assault since you are charging one of the major bases on Shavrath and it would actually make the encounter more appropriately challenging than it currently is, but they should also lower the CR/stats/saves on those orthons, as they're currently too inflated in every way for even the aesthetics of that quest to make sense.

Suggestion to the developers for the Tower of Despair end fight: 1 out of the 4 Orthons is a big general mob with his only immunity being instadeath immunity, Flesh to Stone immunity, and Mental Compulsion (I.E. Dance) immunity, but the rest of his saves are ramped up so he can still be held if you manage to land it. The rest of the orthons should be made into less powerful Orthons so that it's more like we're fighting the forces at Horoth's command as well as the generals loyal to him still. Currently it makes no sense to have a mob of elite guards coming in. This would make it less taxing of a task to keep up this two front battle against a boss who's already challenging enough.

RE: Energy Drain - No change please. These are level 9 spells, they're supposed to be powerful spells, not trivialized abortions of their base sp value. If they want to have casters doing mass deathward, more power to them. If they want mobs to start giving greater heroism to each other or good hope, more power to them, it might give us a use for Mordenkainen's Disjunction/Greater Dispel, but leave the level drain alone, since that's inadvertently giving more immunities that shouldn't exist to monsters.

[sephiroth1084]

I would actually like to see boss immunties changed to something like double or triple saves. That way there is a very small chance of getting through on a boss with a CC spell. Bosses would have to be capped on negative levels though to prevent the cast of numerous energy drains followed by other spells.

I'm not sure this would be reasonable for real bosses (raid bosses) as you just have too many players spamming effects, at least for some types of CC.

It'd be really awesome if we could affect bosses with more effects, though, but with consequences. I've suggested it before, and I'll suggest it again:

Rather than making bosses immune to stuff like trip, instead give them a reactionary effect that triggers when this lands. For example, you can trip boss X, but when you do, he hits the ground so hard that he causes a shockwave, damaging everyone around him and forcing a Reflex save to avoid getting knocked down themselves.

[Junts]

I agree with you on the Inspired Quarter. I believe that have that quest line is pretty well balanced for CC.

Let me get more specific when I say some saves rates need to be increased; Flesh to Stone is the spell that I am really talking about here. I can't think of any other spell that is completely out of line for length of time between saves (given current save levels). Now, if the devs decide to reduce save levels and reduce immunties of the mobs in many quests, we may see some of the time between saves might be too long.

If by balanced you mean ridiculously easy cakewalks, yes.

Its pretty difficult to talk about the viability of different tactics in content that is, to be honest, extraordinarily easy regardless of how you approach it. CC is viable in the inspired quarter, sure. So are melee bards with shields on. That doesn't necessarily reflect on the rest of the game. The entire module's so easy that, if it's where cc is 'balanced', then cc is indeed in a bad place.

[Aashrym]

I think you aren't making the distinction between tod's spam respawning orthons meant to be a hassle, and random hi meet my 50 fort save elite-difficulty trashmob orthon with 12,000 hit points.

I get the impression you have absolutely no DDO endgame experience whatsoever.

I was going by your quote regarding the trivialization of the comment when you were agreeing with Borror0 regarding changes.

I made have missed something on your quote (out of context maybe?) but it looks to me like you were saying "3 energy drains to stack on 15 negative levels (for -30 to fort saves) ensured that they would never, ordinarly, save out. It trivializes challenge when you use cc this way."

Is your position that you feel that tactic trivializes the the challenge and the you still do not want to give it up?

I'm not a fan of nerfing any CC btw. I'm just trying to debate ways to work in some of the issue mentioned earlier in this thread. I think the respawn mechanic to increase difficulty is not a great way of doing it, especially if CC becomes a concern by affecting the difficulty of the instance.

I thought you seemed like a good sounding board based on some of your earlier posts.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

I would actually like to see boss immunties changed to something like double or triple saves. That way there is a very small chance of getting through on a boss with a CC spell. Bosses would have to be capped on negative levels though to prevent the cast of numerous energy drains followed by other spells.

I have agreed with you guys, but energy drain is fine the way it is. I even agree with Junts on this point.

I havent seen any point that proves energy drain needs to be altered, whether its our energy drain or the mobs energy drain.

[Borror0]

You are suffused with a magic that strengthens you life force, making you resistant to effects that attack your soul or whatever.

I know that, but why a second save? In terms of Slippery Mind, it's that you find the resolve to oppose it a second time. How does Death Ward get you to try a second time? It's not easy to picture. On the other hand, things like "Magic makes you better at resisting by increasing your fortitude" are fairly intuitive.

How is that any different from granting +10 to saves and making a 1 no longer a failure? That's even surer immunity.

It's not immunity if the developer does not want it to be. +10 is clearly too much, in retrospect - I was trying to find something that scaled well but started at a significant amount of saves to be worth casting, but overdid t - but a bonus to saves does not act the same as a second dice.

Here's the formula for save success with two d20 dices:

([chance to succeed roll]+[chance to succeed roll]*[chance to fail roll])*100%=[chance to make save]

If we input values in it, you'll notice it pushes everything up to the top very quickly. Even a monster with a success rate as low as 50% reaches a success rate of 80% before accounting for SR. That's without adding the +5 to saves you've put in there (which raise that to a 88% success rate). That's all fine if you want low success rate, but that's not what is wanted. If it's too low, it's just annoying spam until it lands.

And, that's the problem. For as long as the saves are well set, my incarnation would still lead to decent success rates. Yours, however, would quickly push about everything in the 70%+ range. Mine, if we lower the bonus under +10, wouldn't.
Some monsters could be using a low-level version of it (clicky, pot, whatever), which would ablate faster...maybe in only one or two castings.

Heroic Surge itself might not be, but the other effect the devs introduced which is targeted at these things is the immunity to CC for a period of time after being affected by it.

No. That's what Heroic Surge is: being immune for CC for a short period of time to prevent being CC'd right away. What was added on later was the shortened duration.

Neither of those are aimed at making air elemental less annoying.

[Aashrym]

I have agreed with you guys, but energy drain is fine the way it is. I even agree with Junts on this point.

I havent seen any point that proves energy drain needs to be altered, whether its our energy drain or the mobs energy drain.

You even agree with Junts? lol

I thought he made a lot of good points earlier actually. I just thought the idea was worth discussing.

[Zenako]

Just want to make sure everyone understands that the SAVE frequency for FtS has been dramatically shortened on Lamannia...

Per the RELEASE NOTES
The following spells are no longer permanent for players or monsters. Both players and monsters enjoy reoccurring saves against this effect, though players get saves more frequently. The spells now last 60 seconds plus 10 per caster level. The effects have a diminished duration on players.
Feeblemind
Flesh to Stone

When you check it out, you can see the mobs rolling saves every few seconds. Unless you Energy drain them, they make the save pretty quickly. So from that standpoint, unless you were seriously overlevel, Heroic Surge was a moot point, since the mobs would break free via saves LONG before the HS would kick in.

Unless they change things back, the 1/min save for Flesh to Stone is more like 1/6 Seconds (or less). Put it this way, Trogs in House D Dungeons of X quests were break free from DC33 FtS spells in 15 to 20 seconds, and often sooner. Even if they only have a +15 DC, that gives them a 15% chance to save, and if you get to roll every few seconds, you will succeed on one pretty soon.

So the concern needs to not be solely focused on the HS end of things, but the other changes to spell functions as listed in the Notes.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Just want to make sure everyone understands that the SAVE frequency for FtS has been dramatically shortened on Lamannia...

Thanks for your testing and clarifying this. I guess I should take the plunge and check this out for myself as well. That math is scary, and will STILL forever end the way certain toons are played and built.

CC durations should NOT be lessened from the way they are now. It is just that simple.

This is going to be a very unpopular update if CC is further nerfed in the way you described...

[sephiroth1084]

I know that, but why a second save? In terms of Slippery Mind, it's that you find the resolve to oppose it a second time. How does Death Ward get you to try a second time? It's not easy to picture. On the other hand, things like "Magic makes you better at resisting by increasing your fortitude" are fairly intuitive.

I think this is just a case of mechanics not marrying flavor in the way you see them. That's irrelevant for the time being, because a concept justifying the effect can be created later.

It's not immunity if the developer does not want it to be. +10 is clearly too much, in retrospect - I was trying to find something that scaled well but started at a significant amount of saves to be worth casting, but overdid t - but a bonus to saves does not act the same as a second dice.

Here's the formula for save success with two d20 dices:

([chance to succeed roll]+[chance to succeed roll]*[chance to fail roll])*100%=[chance to make save]

If we input values in it, you'll notice it pushes everything up to the top very quickly. Even a monster with a success rate as low as 50% reaches a success rate of 80% before accounting for SR. That's without adding the +5 to saves you've put in there (which raise that to a 88% success rate). That's all fine if you want low success rate, but that's not what is wanted. If it's too low, it's just annoying spam until it lands.

And, that's the problem. For as long as the saves are well set, my incarnation would still lead to decent success rates. Yours, however, would quickly push about everything in the 70%+ range. Mine, if we lower the bonus under +10, wouldn't.
Some monsters could be using a low-level version of it (clicky, pot, whatever), which would ablate faster...maybe in only one or two castings.

I'm tired, so I may have missed some of your point, but are we talking about the same proposal? It seems to me that you took my idea as being +5 to saves and a reroll on a failure. If that's not the case, you can stop reading this part. If it is, then you missed my point--the reroll only occurs on a roll of 1. That ends up being somewhat equivalent to your initial idea, but leaves the possibility of someone still failing, regardless of their saves, though characters with good saves would likely be rendered immune with this 399 times out of 400.

Your idea, as I saw it, was "bonus to saves + no longer failing on a 1 automatically," whereas mine is 'bonus to saves + reroll on a 1.' I suppose that if a character has something like an 80% chance to save, your idea works out better, as they can roll in that bracket and fail, whereas under my idea their success rate goes up a bit, as if they roll a 2, 3 or 4 they fail, but on a 1, they may succeed. Yet under my suggestion, even a character with huge saves could fail on rare occasions, while under yours no such possibility exists.

No. That's what Heroic Surge is: being immune for CC for a short period of time to prevent being CC'd right away. What was added on later was the shortened duration.

Neither of those are aimed at making air elemental less annoying.

No? What other effects are there where this is a real issue? How often to players get subjected to Hold, Dance, Web, etc... repeatedly and annoyingly? Trip is a big deal, and air elementals are loathed by a large number of people in the community.

[Borror0]

If it is, then you missed my point--the reroll only occurs on a roll of 1.

I need sleep.

No? What other effects are there where this is a real issue? How often to players get subjected to Hold, Dance, Web, etc... repeatedly and annoyingly?

It happens in small groups. Three casters versus one player is harsher than three caster versus six players.

[sephiroth1084]

I need sleep.

Me too

It happens in small groups. Three casters versus one player is harsher than three caster versus six players.

True, but how often does a landed CC leave a player alive long enough for Heroic Surge or temporary immunity to matter?

[Borror0]

True, but how often does a landed CC leave a player alive long enough for Heroic Surge or temporary immunity to matter?

If being CC means quick death, we got another problem. But, to answer your question, probably more frequently than you think.

[sephiroth1084]

If being CC means quick death, we got another problem. But, to answer your question, probably more frequently than you think.

Well, CC often does mean a quick death, for us anyway. My AC tanks tended to fair well since they had enough AC, HP and saves to withstand or avoid the beating I'd take while held, for example, and get out of the control quickly.

My ranger and rogue (and casters sometimes) usually died.