Crowd Control/Heroic Surge Feedback

[redoubt]

No.

No.

Yes.

You seem to mistakenly equate it to "useful" or "good."

WRONG. lol.

[Favis]

If the root problem they were attempting to address was based on low level quest issues, then a fix that focuses on those levels and potentially lost players is more appropriate. Not sure too many end game players are quitting since they borked a save and died. That is a core consequence of a d20 system, sometimes you get the short stick.

Good thought.
With raise dead more common past lvl 10 a death is not the same as on early levels.

[Pharaun78]

I'm still playing catch-up with all these posts, but this is a very interesting post.

Thank you.

This, more than anything in this entire voluminous thread fills me heart with glee. A Dev saying he finds upgrading mob spell casting 'very interesting' ... a sign of great things to come?

Onto the main point of my post. I wanted to make a comment regarding CC, and some motivation for upgrading its role a bit, at endgame. (**** those irremovable immunities!! ... **** them to Shavarath!! ... let us mordekeins them plse! ... true caster battles, with dispelling, monsters reapplying prots, casters working in tandem to take mobs down ... U dispel, I hold etc. etc.)

To start, why do people typically stay loyal to a mmo, regardless of it being ... meh (yes U WoW :P)? Sure, game-play gets you hooked, but ultimately it's because your friends are there! (If not true, why not just play solo games?) True, there's also the 'prestige' factor ... I want others to see how l33t I am, but even then, you want people who you know are competent to give you that respect. What I'm getting at, is that it boils down to group play ... working together, accomplishing things as a group. That's what keeps people coming back for more.

My argument, is that good CC, encourages group play. Take Hold. Caster loves to land it, melees love the blue rings ... yum, let me get over there and crit the livin hell outta that beastie!! ... both players enjoy the teamwork. IMO, this beats Insta death effects ... sure, fingerin the caster at the back makes people happy too (efficiency rules) ... but giving the sluggers a chance to chop up that caster ... what barb does not love seeing those massive crits? Experiencing this scenario as both a caster and melee, I've seen time and again how this combo makes a group, and yes pugs too, a merry band of looters and pillagers.

Insta death often has the opposite effect. What melee toon has not had a mob Fod'd/PK'd just in front of him, as he was about to start swinging ... and not somewhere, deep inside, thought HEY, that was mine!!? CC makes for more variety, since the monster can save, get helped by a friend etc. Teamwork has to 'seal the deal'. Running around banshee'in at portals is hardly fun ... well, maybe the first couple of times. My argument, is that Insta-death effects, in comparison to cc, are more detrimental to teamwork ...

To finish, I'd like to lay claim that CC does not need buffs as it stands, but in order to make casters more fun, and attractive to groups, rather give the role of Abjuration some love. No insta death/mass holds of the bat, but you can work for it, throw in some E-drains/curses ... dispel/disjunct or 2 ... viola ... THEN u can ply your trade again (at least till that annoying cleric death wards them ... AGAIN ... argh) ... but all this gives the mobs a chance to sling some nasty your way too ... 'no challenge, no fun'

Done rambling, great job MadFloyd

PS: Oh yes, regarding a previous comment made about how death is not as devastating in later levels, due to abundance of raise dead/resurrect ... good enough reason to give mobs some vorpals/smiters (sorry WF's)?

[Favis]

IMO air elemental knockdown should be similar to the web immunity monsters get after either making a save against it, or making their ability check to get out. If you are knocked down you should be immune to being knocked down again for some short duration (5-7 seconds). This should also apply if you succeed your opposed ability check to avoid being knocked down.

I tend to think in terms of real life... which D&D was kinda trying to emulate.

Air eles have two sides.. 1 is the hurl effect the other is the knockdown.

If you get hurled and your balance sucks you fall over, I don't see why having been knocked over once should make you immune to being knocked over again.

The eles should have a timer on their trip effect just like we do.
...

air elemental knockdown is one of the few CC things that makes the game less fun.
It's boring because you are getting hit at and at the same time you can do any thing. And when you think you might be able to contribute you are go knocked down again.
If I compare it with getting CC by some other effects:
fascinated or hypnotized feel a bit strange but ones you are getting hit you can move and you never get the same spell again.
Sleep has only happened to me in von 4. It feels a bit surrealistic as it so rare. If it happened often if would be a pain. So I can see the point of not having players stuck in sleep or flesh to stone.
And even if Otto’s is not as long you can getting hit and not be able to move (same with hold).

But none of the spells are as even close to being as frustrated as being knocked down. So personally I don't care much how we get rid of it. Immunities from "knockdown" ones we(player) have been knocked down would be find with me. Or changing the monster to getting more variations of attack. Like letting them do something that don't concern CC like 10 s after they have tried to knock people down. In the similar way that some mobs alternate between CC and damage spells.
But if would be nice to get a way with that without the monster getting temporary imunities to you own CC.

[Paragon]

Thank you for the attention you're giving this issue MadFloyd. I believe you should readdress the spell changes you have made and change them back to pre-update 3 durations, and here is why:

As FtS is the most prominent spell change, I will primarily address it.

As some remember, when Flesh to Stone was first implemented, it was much like it is in update 3--it would last a short time with frequent saves. Players complained about this for several reasons. First, it runs counter to the PnP nature of the spell as being permanent. Second, it was really just a glorified Hold Monster with a fort save. As a higher level spell, it should be different and, *gasp*, better. Third, players believed that the spell should essentially be a kill spell, as the petrification effect is a "kill" in PnP. So the spell was changed to its current live implementation.

Now, the first point we all know and have argued to death. It's the other two that I think are more interesting regarding not only FtS but all cc spells in general. Spells of higher level should be more powerful and more useful than their lower-level counterparts. Just so, spells cast by a higher level caster should be more powerful than those cast by a low level caster. For cc spells, duration is often the primary form of power. Higher level spells and/or those cast by a higher level caster should last a fair time. This also applies to time between saves. Less time between saves is less duration, and higher level spells should by their very nature give fewer opportunities to end duration early. Flesh to Stone as it currently exists is possibly the one cc spell to which this principle is properly applied--it is much like Hold Monster, but with a possibly infinite duration and a long separation between saves. Other spells do effectively have more power than their lower-level counterparts, but in other ways. For example, the dance line is first a single-target spell, then a mass version, then the irresistable version. But when looking at Hold Monster vs. Flesh to Stone, the only distinction that actually makes FtS more powerful is duration.

When comparing lower level vs. higher level casters, duration and dc are the two factors that make cc spells more powerful coming from higher level casters. DC, however, is more of a factor that determines how powerful of an enemy you can effect. Duration is the factor that determines how powerful the spell is against those it does effect. As players' spells increase in DC, more often than not monster saves increase to keep a balance. This is good and fine, but it also means that, when running at level, the high level mage is no more powerful than the low-level up to duration. When duration enters the picture is where the high level mage finally gets its due power. Nerfing durations to only last a short time regardless of level or other circumstances is making it so that cc casters of higher level will feel frustrated and helpless, unable to make the sort of major impact on quests and tactics that they feel they should be able to. Higher level casters should be able to make a larger impact when they land their spells. For damage spells, you get to deal more damage. For cc, it should last longer.

Now for a point on tactics, regarding the uses of crowd control and why long duration is often extremely important in all kinds of tactics. First, I have mentioned in previous posts that should be usable as substitutes for killing everything. There are xp bonuses in game for completing quests without killing any or many monsters. Many players enjoy the challenge of trying to achieve these bonuses. Many like to see what they can do without killing and with minimal combat. To this end, long duration crowd control is one method of dealing with monsters that should be allowed as a substitute to killing them. How different is it for gameplay and the challenge of questing whether players use FoD or FtS to either kill or permanently disable monsters? Fascinate also comes to mind. It has its own drawbacks, namely that it is a mesmerizing effect that breaks when any damage is dealt, making it less useful in other situations. If balancing needs to be done on fascinate, it is on the dc end rather than duration.

This talk of fascinate brings me to my next point on tactics--that lasting long enough for the monster to be dead is not good enough for crowd control. The most intelligent use of cc is not to keep a monster from moving while you kill it. It is to keep the monster still while you kill its allies that are still moving. That's why it's called crowd control. The idea is to cut down the number of monsters you attacking you at once. Mesmers, such as fascinate, demonstrate this perfectly. You don't use fascinate like you use FtS or Hold Monster. By design it does not let melees kill the things you hit with it. Instead, it clears those monsters from the field for the duration of the effect, making them a non-issue for as long as the fascinate lasts. This lets other players deal with the rest of the monsters, and then allows you to break the fascinated mobs one by one and kill them off. The same is the best use of Otto's Sphere of Dancing and even Web. The best use is to keep a bunch of mobs out of the fight while you deal with the rest, then take out the cc'ed mobs at your pleasure. This is not possible if cc only lasts long enough for you to kill the cc'ed thing. Even FtS works this way, removing a monster from the fight until the other players have the time to deal with it. Hold, on the other hand, does not, as the monster will likely break and so needs to be quickly eliminated while autocrit is up. The long duration of cc spells thus enables their best and most intelligent uses--removal of a monster from combat so allied combatants don't have to worry about it until they want to. Then, when other fighting is over, they can deal with the cc'ed mobs.

This brings us back to playstyle. Removing long-duration cc is removing a whole playstyle from the game. It means that cc cannot be put to its most effective use, removing monsters from combat. Being able to remove monsters from combat is also what allows players who are good enough to remove all the monsters from combat and complete quests without killing. Whether you're killing or not, long duration is a big part of smart cc useage. Removing long duration cc is removing the best and smartest pratices of crowd control. CC that only holds something long enough until you can kill it makes it a debuff rather than cc. For it to be cc and be used as cc, it needs to have the enough duration to allow players to divide and conquer with it, to cut down the size of groups they fight, and ultimately to temporarily (or permanently) remove some of the mobs from combat.

Please let cc serve its purpose and give it the duration it needs to do that.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Removing long-duration cc is removing a whole playstyle from the game. It means that cc cannot be put to its most effective use, removing monsters from combat. Being able to remove monsters from combat is also what allows players who are good enough to remove all the monsters from combat and complete quests without killing. Whether you're killing or not, long duration is a big part of smart cc useage. Removing long duration cc is removing the best and smartest pratices of crowd control. CC that only holds something long enough until you can kill it makes it a debuff rather than cc.

QFT.

THIS is what I want to see Mad comment on. Because this is at the crux of the Debate. To say THIS doesnt matter, is saying entire BUILDS dont matter.

CC duration needs to remain un-touched.

If its truly too late to "go back", then its obvious the community should have been involved BEFORE such game-wide, universal changes were made.

Id rather WAIT for the changes to be undone then to have an update go live that DESTROYS this particular PLAYSTYLE.

[Angelus_dead]

Id rather WAIT for the changes to be undone then to have an update go live that DESTROYS this particular PLAYSTYLE.

Do you have an example of the playstyle that would be destroyed? Something more specific than "cc caster", because seriously, nobody makes a caster who can only cc.

I tried the changes, and didn't see a lot of difference. Yeah, you can't leave things as statues for 2-10 minutes, but they're basically going to be killed with autocrits in under 30 seconds anyhow. Yeah, you can't use one Irresistable Dance to keep an epic mob standing until he dies, so you use two.

Aside from certain exploit-like reactions to respawning mobs, what style is it that's been "destroyed"?

[Angelus_dead]

Suggestion for devs:

When a monster performs a Heroic Surge (or similar), he pays for it by suffering significant hitpoint damage on himself.

[moorewr]

In my playtesting it seemed that, given typical party CC (disco, ir. dance, f2s) the mobs would be dead before they 'surged.' In the specific case of f2s, it bugs me that they can free themselves without another caster reversing the spell.. but that's the PnP player in me talking (as usual).

Note that even in the first screen shot I'd been idle long enough for my combat log to fade out, and that another 30 seconds went by before the first surge (EDIT: or just a normal save?) kicked in.






(PS: no making fun of my layout! I'd just reincarnated him! )

[Sarezar]

I'm still playing catch-up with all these posts, but this is a very interesting post.

Thank you.

That post is the sum of thousands (literally) posts on these subjects. I am not accusing you of not reading our feedback, but seriously:
- AI
- Enemy casting
- Air Ellies
have been discussed hundreds of times on all DDO forums/Podcasts/Blogs etc around the world.

There is no arguement that can negate a player's "assumption" that these changes are more of a nerf, or their frustration when they see that the Development team continually chooses the "easy" way.

[Ponza69]

Thank you for the attention you're giving this issue MadFloyd. I believe you should readdress the spell changes you have made and change them back to pre-update 3 durations, and here is why:

As FtS is the most prominent spell change, I will primarily address it.

As some remember, when Flesh to Stone was first implemented, it was much like it is in update 3--it would last a short time with frequent saves. Players complained about this for several reasons. First, it runs counter to the PnP nature of the spell as being permanent. Second, it was really just a glorified Hold Monster with a fort save. As a higher level spell, it should be different and, *gasp*, better. Third, players believed that the spell should essentially be a kill spell, as the petrification effect is a "kill" in PnP. So the spell was changed to its current live implementation.

Could the developers re-code teh FtS so that after some time say 5 to 30 secs the stoned mob crumbles to death. It could even have flavor text "the stoned <troll> creaks and cracks as it crumbles to the floor to be no more"

Do you have an example of the playstyle that would be destroyed? Something more specific than "cc caster", because seriously, nobody makes a caster who can only cc.

The example I would point to is the DDO pre-set Virturoso of the sword Bard. At low levels sure the sword thing works but latter on the longer duration of enthrall is needed to get through all the mobs that are mezzed. Sure there are other things this bard can do and do pretty good. But ultimately is focused on entrhall - music of the XXX - mass suggestion -OID - etc.

To be honest with everyone here - I like the Air elementals - it is a fun challenge to either get off a mass suggestion in-between getting knocked down or trying to jump away on a save. usually 1 in 4 times I will get something off that save the bacon. Only had to run away and dd once. Unless its a named I will invis and run by it.

[Borror0]

The example I would point to is the DDO pre-set Virturoso of the sword Bard. At low levels sure the sword thing works but latter on the longer duration of enthrall is needed to get through all the mobs that are mezzed. Sure there are other things this bard can do and do pretty good. But ultimately is focused on entrhall - music of the XXX - mass suggestion -OID - etc.

It's not a good bard. It has Cleave, Great Cleave, Mental Toughness, Improved Mental Toughness, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Bastard Sword for its feats. All of those are feats I would most definitively not recommend any bard who intends to melee to pick.

Additionally, it has 10 base Con which is an horrible crime; nothing lower than 12 is justifiable.

[Ponza69]

Well Boro thanks

Are we discussion what is a good and bad build or are we talking about CC

The points I made earlier in this thread abotu removing the virturoso are based around what is being discussed here.

What should a new player think about that - Are all of DDOs presets bad builds. Should I re-roll after 3 months of play and 16 to 17 levels or should I go for TR after 20.

If DDO has pre-sets for new players they should not be bad - if they are then maybe DDO should work on this aspect if they are targeting new players to the community.

While I experienced issues in the 9th to 13th levels - I am finding a lot of fun in this build at my current level. As you say it is situational.

[Borror0]

Well Boro thanks

Are we discussion what is a good and bad build or are we talking about CC

The problem is that you're saying that a poorly built bard is being harmed. Yes, of course, since that bards is not built to do anything well: it has poor damage, poor CC capability, low HP and gains nothing valuable from making sacrifices in these departments. Its contribution to the party revolves around singing Inspire Courage and using Fascinate (well, Enthrallment but that's pretty much the same) but any bard can do that.

If DDO has pre-sets for new players they should not be bad - if they are then maybe DDO should work on this aspect if they are targeting new players to the community.

We told them, but they didn't do a thing about it.

[MadFloyd]

We told them, but they didn't do a thing about it.

Actually we did; it just took us a while.

[Borror0]

Actually we did; it just took us a while.

Cool. I love being wrong, sometimes. Slated for Update 4 or no date yet?

[MadFloyd]

Cool. I love being wrong, sometimes. Slated for Update 4 or no date yet?

Well up until this very week you were right. :-)

Update 5 most likely (Update 4 is already in testing).

[Borror0]

Well up until this very week you were right. :-)

So I was almost right!

[Lorien_the_First_One]

Well up until this very week you were right. :-)

Update 5 most likely (Update 4 is already in testing).

Now that's interesting

[muffinlad]

Thank you for the attention you're giving this issue MadFloyd. I believe you should readdress the spell changes you have made and change them back to pre-update 3 durations, and here is why:

As FtS is the most prominent spell change, I will primarily address it.

As some remember, when Flesh to Stone was first implemented, it was much like it is in update 3--it would last a short time with frequent saves. Players complained about this for several reasons. First, it runs counter to the PnP nature of the spell as being permanent. Second, it was really just a glorified Hold Monster with a fort save. As a higher level spell, it should be different and, *gasp*, better. Third, players believed that the spell should essentially be a kill spell, as the petrification effect is a "kill" in PnP. So the spell was changed to its current live implementation.

Now, the first point we all know and have argued to death. It's the other two that I think are more interesting regarding not only FtS but all cc spells in general. Spells of higher level should be more powerful and more useful than their lower-level counterparts. Just so, spells cast by a higher level caster should be more powerful than those cast by a low level caster. For cc spells, duration is often the primary form of power. Higher level spells and/or those cast by a higher level caster should last a fair time. This also applies to time between saves. Less time between saves is less duration, and higher level spells should by their very nature give fewer opportunities to end duration early. Flesh to Stone as it currently exists is possibly the one cc spell to which this principle is properly applied--it is much like Hold Monster, but with a possibly infinite duration and a long separation between saves. Other spells do effectively have more power than their lower-level counterparts, but in other ways. For example, the dance line is first a single-target spell, then a mass version, then the irresistable version. But when looking at Hold Monster vs. Flesh to Stone, the only distinction that actually makes FtS more powerful is duration.

When comparing lower level vs. higher level casters, duration and dc are the two factors that make cc spells more powerful coming from higher level casters. DC, however, is more of a factor that determines how powerful of an enemy you can effect. Duration is the factor that determines how powerful the spell is against those it does effect. As players' spells increase in DC, more often than not monster saves increase to keep a balance. This is good and fine, but it also means that, when running at level, the high level mage is no more powerful than the low-level up to duration. When duration enters the picture is where the high level mage finally gets its due power. Nerfing durations to only last a short time regardless of level or other circumstances is making it so that cc casters of higher level will feel frustrated and helpless, unable to make the sort of major impact on quests and tactics that they feel they should be able to. Higher level casters should be able to make a larger impact when they land their spells. For damage spells, you get to deal more damage. For cc, it should last longer.

Now for a point on tactics, regarding the uses of crowd control and why long duration is often extremely important in all kinds of tactics. First, I have mentioned in previous posts that should be usable as substitutes for killing everything. There are xp bonuses in game for completing quests without killing any or many monsters. Many players enjoy the challenge of trying to achieve these bonuses. Many like to see what they can do without killing and with minimal combat. To this end, long duration crowd control is one method of dealing with monsters that should be allowed as a substitute to killing them. How different is it for gameplay and the challenge of questing whether players use FoD or FtS to either kill or permanently disable monsters? Fascinate also comes to mind. It has its own drawbacks, namely that it is a mesmerizing effect that breaks when any damage is dealt, making it less useful in other situations. If balancing needs to be done on fascinate, it is on the dc end rather than duration.

This talk of fascinate brings me to my next point on tactics--that lasting long enough for the monster to be dead is not good enough for crowd control. The most intelligent use of cc is not to keep a monster from moving while you kill it. It is to keep the monster still while you kill its allies that are still moving. That's why it's called crowd control. The idea is to cut down the number of monsters you attacking you at once. Mesmers, such as fascinate, demonstrate this perfectly. You don't use fascinate like you use FtS or Hold Monster. By design it does not let melees kill the things you hit with it. Instead, it clears those monsters from the field for the duration of the effect, making them a non-issue for as long as the fascinate lasts. This lets other players deal with the rest of the monsters, and then allows you to break the fascinated mobs one by one and kill them off. The same is the best use of Otto's Sphere of Dancing and even Web. The best use is to keep a bunch of mobs out of the fight while you deal with the rest, then take out the cc'ed mobs at your pleasure. This is not possible if cc only lasts long enough for you to kill the cc'ed thing. Even FtS works this way, removing a monster from the fight until the other players have the time to deal with it. Hold, on the other hand, does not, as the monster will likely break and so needs to be quickly eliminated while autocrit is up. The long duration of cc spells thus enables their best and most intelligent uses--removal of a monster from combat so allied combatants don't have to worry about it until they want to. Then, when other fighting is over, they can deal with the cc'ed mobs.

This brings us back to playstyle. Removing long-duration cc is removing a whole playstyle from the game. It means that cc cannot be put to its most effective use, removing monsters from combat. Being able to remove monsters from combat is also what allows players who are good enough to remove all the monsters from combat and complete quests without killing. Whether you're killing or not, long duration is a big part of smart cc useage. Removing long duration cc is removing the best and smartest pratices of crowd control. CC that only holds something long enough until you can kill it makes it a debuff rather than cc. For it to be cc and be used as cc, it needs to have the enough duration to allow players to divide and conquer with it, to cut down the size of groups they fight, and ultimately to temporarily (or permanently) remove some of the mobs from combat.

Please let cc serve its purpose and give it the duration it needs to do that.

Thank you for writing the post I was going to. Well reasoned, and well presented and...polite.

+1 for you, and to our friendly Developers, I beg you, please listen/read with care.

muffinplead