Crowd Control/Heroic Surge Feedback

[Borror0]

Why does every encounter require the death of everything.

It does not have to, but those spells is what most would call "an Easy Button" and THAT is the problem.

Like Aspenor said, it's more or less a "Just die. no save." ability since the DC is so high that no mob could ever make a save against Fascinate on anything but a d20, at end game. By using Fascinate, you overcome a whole encounter by just pressing one key and then running away (or killing them one by one at no cost, if that's your thing). Mass Suggestion acts in the exact same way (except that you can Dismiss Charm Monsters one by one so they kill each other, using even less resources than Fascinate).

Remember the amount of songs are limited too, and the character probably sacrificed other things to get all those songs and extended duration.

Bards get 20 songs just for being level 20 and last three minutes without doing anything out of the ordinary.

You still haven't commented on timer respawn instead of last mob down respawns.

I did, several times. My answer can be summed into two words: server performances.

If most of the problem you guys have with CC is fascinate, following the rules can put an end to them. It doesn't need a whole new mechanic that will remove CC from the game.

What mechanism are you talking about?

[redoubt]

I think I pretty much covered it all in post #721. Let me know if you still have more questions.

.

You did and I edited my post to say so. Apparantly some stuff has been removed from the thread as our posts in question are now lower numbers.

[redoubt]

You're probably aware of that but your way to fix things is several times much more time consuming (and therefore costly) than merely changing the duration. You need a solid reasoning and great advantages to make up for the additional efforts required by your chosen method.

I don't deny the possibility that you do, but if so, what are they?

Is the easy solution always the best one?

[Borror0]

Is the easy solution always the best one?

No, which is why I asked if he had good reasons to justify the additional work.

[KKDragonLord]

Bards get 20 songs just for being level 20 and last three minutes without doing anything out of the ordinary.

I did, several times. My answer can be summed into two words: server performances.

As i said, Fascinate in PnP can only be used once. 20 songs wouldnt be an issue then.

Also, there are various methods to deal with Server performance that don't require a dumb game, game designers study and develop these.

as for...

If most of the problem you guys have with CC is fascinate, following the rules can put an end to them. It doesn't need a whole new mechanic that will remove CC from the game.

What mechanism are you talking about?

Idk, maybe the Title of the thread?
The Project Madfloyd is back to the drawing board with?
If only someone went out to lammania and checked them out and brought us results...
oh wait... they did.

Extremely short saves, and temporary immunities wasn't it?

I see what you did there Borr, its seems that you intend to circle back all the way to what you first claimed, that this mechanic isn't that bad, that it doesn't matter, that its necessary, that its the Only way to deal with the problem etc...

im sorry, i am not much in the mood for a merry go round.

[KKDragonLord]

The most powerful CC spell on DDO is wall of fire.

Cause it gets you the aggro to kite with.

I also agree with this, though for different reasons. The problem with Wall of Fire is exactly a lack of work to make mobs deal with them intelligently. Aka, how easy it is to exploit them, this doesn't look very flattering to the game from any perspective, especially compared to other games. We all know that.

But if Turbine decided to give Temporary immunities to mobs that stayed inside the wall for longer than one tick, how would that look?

[Borror0]

As i said, Fascinate in PnP can only be used once. 20 songs wouldnt be an issue then.

That comment was in reply to Gornin, not to you. You're taking it out of context and misrepresenting what I said with that quote of yours.

Idk, maybe the Title of the thread?

Heroic Surge does not "remove CC from the game" and pretending it does is ludicrous.

Additionally, Aspenor previously said, "I don't like heroic surge, especially for monsters. I think there are better ways to go about achieving the same goal." Replying to him as if he supported Heroic Surge is thus dishonest and pointless. As for others in the thread you might have tried to reply to, Junts and I agree that Heroic Surge should be limited to monsters and that problematic spells should be changed individually rather than applying a global change, so you're not addressing to us either.

Extremely short saves

Heroic Surge is not responsible for that.

[Junts]

Oh no, I do understand. My poor wizzy has started a spider farm to keep up with the spell components from casting all those heightened webs.

And I have grouped with you on a number of occasions, I know how capable you are as a player, and I do value your insight, I just disagree that shortening durations would affect how you play. It would affect those who aren't up to snuff, and that would not be a good thing IMO.

I maintain that quest and AI design is the bigger problem than durations.

I have dropped a couple of basic ideas, but those better than I at this stuff seem to have ignored them. Maybe a better idea/system could be grown from those, or suggestions from other posters.

And lastly, not directed at you except as a group, what is wrong in trying to stay true to PnP in spirit? Making CC something more useful than "Root and Kill" is a worthy goal.

Shortening durations would affect me in the situations where I abuse fascinate or fts. But more importantly, I would gladly use other cc methods if only they were useful. And for Otto's dancing sphere or dominate person to work, so too does my bard's mass suggestion, and as the game sits right now, if they just lwoered will saves and immunities, I'd just spam mass suggest through every quest and ignore the mobs. I wouldn't actually cast sphere or dominate. They've got to fix the outliers so they can, in turn, make all cc forms work. Its a two-step process. When fascinate and suggest work like they do, there's no way they can allow them to be used so widely. Which in turn means nothing else in the enchantment school can be used at all.

[Mjesko]

Low-level CC is already bordering on useless in groups because of the way level affects duration--it might last too long at 20, but at 4 you'd have to recast a time or two just to get it to last through any significant fight. While the ceiling might indeed be too high, the floor is too low for any blanket nerf to not devastate the lower third of the game.

I think that is a problem of all spells with durations in DDO. They scale too much for an online game. At level 5 haste has a duration of only 30 seconds, but at level 20 it lasts 2 minutes.

The spells should not have a duration based on the caster level. They should have a duration, that is always based on a level 10 caster. That would make the spells useful, but not overpowered.

[KKDragonLord]

That comment was in reply to Gornin, not to you. You're taking it out of context and misrepresenting what I said with that quote of yours.

I am not misrepresenting, i did not change what you said. I am showing an example of how respecting PnP can be beneficial. I did change the placement of the quote though, to prevent misinterpretations.

Additionally, Aspenor previously said, "I don't like heroic surge, especially for monsters. I think there are better ways to go about achieving the same goal."

Replying to him as if he supported Heroic Surge is thus dishonest and pointless.

I never said he supported Heroic Surge, in fact you are the one placing our discussion out of context.

As for others in the thread you might have tried to reply to, Junts and I agree that Heroic Surge should be limited to monsters and that problematic spells should be change individually rather than applying a global change so you're not addressing to us either.

We are all in agreement on this, but it isn't the issue we are discussing, it is how spells should be changed.

Heroic Surge does not "remove CC from the game" and pretending it does is ludicrous.

Extremely short saves

Heroic Surge is not responsible for that.

Might i refer you to the title of the thread?

Crowd Control/Heroic Surge Feedback

The change Turbine has planned is not "Crowd Control: Heroic Surge Feedback"
It is Crowd Control / Heroic Surge Feedback.
Both Crowd Control and Heroic Surge are up for debate.

Extremely short saves is included in the debate.

And your "individual solutions for problematic spells" are, so far, limited to saying that Long CC is bad and thus should be nerfed.

What i have been saying all along is that when employed and dealt with intelligently, it can be non-exploitable, and Necessary. The Benefits of that (you seem to want a thorough Thesis on and i am even considering on writing it), is the enrichment of the game and the Classes that can employ these spells.

Obs: but thanks for the neg rep anyway, and the condescending tone i highlighted above.

[Mjesko]

I must have missed something. I concur that changing the duration of the effects is the way to go, or adjusting the save intervals (i.e. save vs. FtS once every 20-30 seconds).

I think it would be easier to set the fascinate dc to: 10 + (total skill / 2)

[Borror0]

I never said he supported Heroic Surge, in fact you are the one placing our discussion out of context.

I said that you replied to him as if he supported Heroic Surge, not that you said he supported Heroic Surge.

Might i refer you to the title of the thread?

You used the term "mechanic" which I inferred referred to Heroic Surge since it was written at the singular and since none of the other changes do not qualify, in my book, as mechanisms (nor do any of them have the powerful to singlehandedly "remove CC from the game" as you claimed).

And your "individual solutions for problematic spells" are, so far, limited to saying that Long CC is bad and thus should be nerfed.

That's somewhat right. Most of the problems could be solved by reducing the duration of certain spells and/or giving them recurring saves. I don't think it has to be any more complicated than that and someone has yet to persuade me of the contrary. The rest is solved by Heroic Surge, which should be limited to players only.

[KKDragonLord]

I said that you replied to him as if he supported Heroic Surge, not that you said he supported Heroic Surge.

You used the term "mechanic" which I inferred referred to Heroic Surge since it was written at the singular and since none of the other changes do not qualify, in my book, as mechanisms (nor do any of them have the powerful to singlehandedly "remove CC from the game" as you claimed).

That's somewhat right. Most of the problems could be solved by reducing the duration of certain spells and/or giving them recurring saves. I don't think it has to be any more complicated than that and someone has yet to persuade me of the contrary. The rest is solved by Heroic Surge, which should be limited to players only.

What you said was clearly incorrect.

I see its the use of Mechanic on singular that confused you.

Even though all the other words, exchanged by me and Asp were about Fascinate, and strategy and not about Heroic Surge.

Try mechanics then.

I see that you inferred i was only talking about Heroic Surge, despite everything else i said.

I also see you cannot be persuaded that reducing spell durations is a bad thing and that there are other ways of dealing with them.

Well, i am glad i don't need to persuade you Borr and that your selective way of reading prevents you from leaving the "Nerf Box".

I guess this discussion will never end this way, so lets continue to repeat what we said instead of providing alternatives, good or bad.

[M.ham]

It would. With a three minute long Fascinate or with Flesh to Stone, there is simply no way any monster will catch up unless it has ability to teleport (like orthons). If you reduce the duration enough, that's no longer the case. By the time it the duration is over, the players won't be too far and the monsters can catch up for retribution. With a three minute long Fascinate or with Flesh to Stone, it's too easy to bug out respawns. By limiting the duration, it's not as easy...

It sounds as if you are implying that the only way to get past a Mob is to DPS it down. What is the difference between CC and Incapacitation? Does the difference play a role in this discussion?

As a high level Arcane should I not be feared by all? I can FTS, FoD, Destruct, Slay Living and make ye dance till ye fall down. Yet a quick trip by the mob to their local Dev nerfs my most powerfull spells. What advantage is there in taking Spell Focus: Anything but Evocation? In most high level quests I am a buff-bot unless I am specced for DPS (DPS is considered to be high damage or high healing).

As players we are taught to take out the casters first... why is that? They can dispell, debuff, destroy, insta kill, DPS; we use buffs to help combat their spells but they can be removed. How many Arcane players keep Dispell Magic learned? The first quest on the Dreaming Dark series has a Giant Skelly that cannot be Disrupted until his immunity wears off, if you do not want to wait you can DPS him down. Why cannot more mobs be like that, sure they have immunities but they can be removed/circumvented.

If a game forces players to adopt a one build/play style to succeed mentality how long will players keep playing that one build? How many players are going to take the Pale Master PRE? My guess is not many, as it is not a viable DPS Arcane build for end game... sure it is great for flavour but this game is not about flavour. The PRE gets some nice bonuses but are made useless by the Mobs blanket immunities.

This same argument can be made for pretty much any character that is not DPS specced. Want to build that CC Bard... gimped, want to build that Enchantment focused Arcane... gimped, want to build that range focused Ranger... gimped, want to build that properly built 18/1/1 Exploiter... sure come on in. It almost seems that any other focus besides DPS results in a "gimped" character, or the character has to be a heavily twinked multiclass to be considered not "gimped".

My solution to the problem... remove the immunities but throw more mobs at us... make it like Diablo where the group is struggling just to stay alive. The melees are swinging like mad, the Elemental Arcanes are blasting left and right, the control freaks are throwing Mobs against their own, the Pale Masters are bringing the dead back to life and throwing them into the fray, the Rogue is atacking targets of opportunity or opening/disabling etc., the Bards are singing them to sleep... and the cleric keeps screaming something about line of sight

Just my rambling 2 cents... perhaps a little more


M.

[Ponza69]

I do not think that folks in support of HS/CC durations modifications are against CC builds and classes. I think that they recognize that this is the first step in allowing other things to be modified to balance out the game mechanics for content.

I do not think they are focusing on class balance but rather game mechanic balance.

If super long durations are clipped then immunities may be trimmed back.

Its just hard to not hit the panic button and I may still not understand the complexities due to my ignorance.

[Borror0]

It sounds as if you are implying that the only way to get past a Mob is to DPS it down. What is the difference between CC and Incapacitation? Does the difference play a role in this discussion?

I don't think that the only way to pass a mob is to DPS down. However, it is by far the easiest way for developers to great a fun encounter. Anything is a great addition of their part but it would be unrealistic to expect every fight to have such an option.

The difference, and the problem, is how easy it is to use crowd control. I don't mean that it's easy to build a character capable of good CC. No, what I mean is that CC is more or less "press a button and beat the encounter" when you think about it. For example, if Mass Suggestion would land about 50% of the time, why would I not just spam it at each encounters? It would pretty much take care of all the mobs, with one cast.

And, that's where the problem lies: it makes encounters too easy.

I have literally no problem with alternative way to beat quest. In fact, I embrace them because it means a greater variety of players can find something they like or simply because it introduces variety in everyone's gameplay. The problem is when something is several times easier (being simply easier is fine, though).

Is my position clearer?

PS: The rest of the post is a good one. I pretty much agree with it all, except the part about Diablo.

[bekkar]

The difference, and the problem, is how easy it is to use crowd control. I don't mean that it's easy to build a character capable of good CC. No, what I mean is that CC is more or less "press a button and beat the encounter" when you think about it. For example, if Mass Suggestion would land about 50% of the time, why would I not just spam it at each encounters? It would pretty much take care of all the mobs, with one cast.

And, that's where the problem lies: it makes encounters too easy.

I think that's the beginning of the problem rather than the end of it. CC in DDO is generally binary--you make the enemy suck or you don't. An enemy that sucks is not an exciting challenge. Because CC that is effective will end up removing exciting challenges, it frequently must be ineffective in order to make the challenges exciting for everyone else.

Let me say that again: CC must frequently be ineffective in order to make challenges exciting for everyone else.
...and I'm sure that's a lot of fun to tell a CCer: "You have to suck frequently in order to make the game more fun for everyone else."

Right now the approach to magic is that it must be weak and/or unreliable whenever it is used for something other than buffing because, if magic is allowed to be effective, it is less fun for everyone but the caster. The corollary of that statement is that the caster needs to not have fun in order for everyone else to have fun. Is that really the metric we want to use?

This isn't a balance problem, it's a problem with design. If the big question on your mind is "how do I balance CC such that, when it is cast, it won't make the encounter easy" then you are destined to make ineffective CC and non-fun CCers. You need a better question.


Let's step back a moment. Consider this:
A Wizard can only cast a couple spells per typical encounter before falling back on things that won't drain his SP pool. Those couple spells per encounter need to be adding as much benefit to the party as another DPS would--25% faster adventure completions, 20% less damage taken, and so on...just to hit the minimum of being equivalent to adding a fifth DPS slot. That can't really be done by a DPS-attempting Wizard due to resource limits. It can be met or exceeded by a dedicated buffbot Wizard, which is usually not very exciting for the Wizard, or by an CC-casting Wizard, which makes it less exciting for everyone else.

So here's my alternate question, to replace "how do I balance CC such that, when it is cast, it won't make the encounter easy":
How do I balance spellcasters such that, over the course of an adventure, both the caster and his party get a chance to have fun?

[gavagai]

Because people are overestimating how much of an effect that will have. Unless you retreat forward or stall mob generator, it won't change much for you. CC will be pretty much of the same effectiveness outside of those two situations. The effects would still last one minute on Elite and very few combats with trash mobs last for a whole minute.

No, what I mean is that CC is more or less "press a button and beat the encounter" when you think about it.

The arguments that CC is game-breaking and content-busting are highly theoretical. I've never seen a toon that splashed bard to max ranks in perform for an "easy win" button. I've never seen screenies of bards or CC-sorcs soloing raids and epic content with Devious bonuses. LFMs are not screaming "CC needed!!1" like you see for DPS. Supply and Demand say CC specced casters are often not worth a party slot. This is not what a game-breaking imbalance looks like.

CC can be a powerful tool to help us overcome content more easily and with fewer resources, as do GS equipment and firewall. And I think RadII's and firewall are more systematic problems from a game balance standpoint. A greensteel or firewall nerf would seriously shake up the entire game, creating countless issues. The fact that we can have a debate about whether a CC nerf would even be noticeable to most players should tell you that CC is not on the same level.

I'm not against shorter durations/lower DCs if there is a good reason for it. But this is not a good reason for it. Shorter durations won't keep most experienced folk from railroading through content **if they want to avoid it.** Haste and clever maneuvering enable groups to leave most mobs in the dust when one needs to. Even 45 seconds of Fascinate would be enough. CC will not be short enough to make people want to "beat" an encounter they are committed to circumvent. And if duration changes won't do it, then changing durations is not a fast and easy way to fix that particular problem.

At best, all this does is make casters and bards infinitesimally more crappy. I think there are better ways of making players engage the content than changing CC durations. "If the fix don't fit, acquit."

[Xyfiel]

Yeah after a week at sea I am back!

I believe fun is subjective to each player. Some days beating stuff is fun to me, some days I want to nuke stuff, or heal, or CC, or range. I have characters for every aspect of the game, and I enjoy having the option to change based on what I want to do that day. I will not believe anyone or any book what my fun is derived from other then myself. With that said, anything else I say in this post relates to my fun.

CC is at times, fun. Immunities are not, but given the situation(raid bosses), are a necessary evil I will live with due to its overall goal. I do not have a problem with lowering CC durations, but believe fixes should only be applied to specific spells. I also believe when such fixes are applied, that other changes are applied also. Be it immunity removal, lower mob saves, changes to how the spells work, etc. The reason I consider the original implentation a nerf was due to only changing one aspect. I am not against change in general, I just want to maintain some balance in the roles I can play, while maintaining enough fun that I want to play them.

I agree with the theory of Heroic surge, I do not agree with the implementation. I do not think it would have worked out in the players favor much at all, while having a great impact to CC for the average player. Please note I said average player. Players at the low end of the bell curve don't stick many spells anyway. Players at the high end will be effective using other strategies. Of course the better the player, the easier it is for them to take advantage of game aspects. The average player won't have 300+% of healing amp, but a high end player can. Do we need to change healing amp? I don't believe so, but we must consider all players in a change.

So lets come up with something that maintains fun, maintains some resemblence to balance, and keeps as many people happy as possible. I don't know about the rest of you, but I am here to relax and enjoy my time spent here, not worry if I need to reroll another character because the principle concept it was designed around is no longer "fun".

I bid you adieu for now, for I am still researching my shroud solo attempt.

[Junts]

The arguments that CC is game-breaking and content-busting are highly theoretical. I've never seen a toon that splashed bard to max ranks in perform for an "easy win" button. I've never seen screenies of bards or CC-sorcs soloing raids and epic content with Devious bonuses. LFMs are not screaming "CC needed!!1" like you see for DPS. Supply and Demand say CC specced casters are often not worth a party slot. This is not what a game-breaking imbalance looks like.

CC can be a powerful tool to help us overcome content more easily and with fewer resources, as do GS equipment and firewall. And I think RadII's and firewall are more systematic problems from a game balance standpoint. A greensteel or firewall nerf would seriously shake up the entire game, creating countless issues. The fact that we can have a debate about whether a CC nerf would even be noticeable to most players should tell you that CC is not on the same level.

I'm not against shorter durations/lower DCs if there is a good reason for it. But this is not a good reason for it. Shorter durations won't keep most experienced folk from railroading through content **if they want to avoid it.** Haste and clever maneuvering enable groups to leave most mobs in the dust when one needs to. Even 45 seconds of Fascinate would be enough. CC will not be short enough to make people want to "beat" an encounter they are committed to circumvent. And if duration changes won't do it, then changing durations is not a fast and easy way to fix that particular problem.

At best, all this does is make casters and bards infinitesimally more crappy. I think there are better ways of making players engage the content than changing CC durations. "If the fix don't fit, acquit."

Of course crowd control doesn't seem overpowered and in need of a nerf, it was already nerfed into the ground. In Modules 4 and 5, CC and casters in general were so insanely overpowered on DDO that people would put up lfms, by themselves, for sor/wiz/cle only, and anything that used a weapon was completely unwelcome. The response to this was that 4 content releases in the row nerfed crowd control beyond belief. Modules 6, 7, 8 and 9 were all increasingly more and more hostile to CC spells, going from high spell resistance (6) to high sr and high saves (7) to straight up immunities (8) to all 3 with additional bonuses against charms (9). DDO has not released content without built in CC nerfs since the cap was level 14! Of course no one has any use for it outside individual situations (and if you think people aren't doing OOB with fascinate and devious bonuses, well, you haven't been running epic OOB. You get out of devious from the mobs you have to kill with the 3 required named, but you can fascinate the entire rest of the quest, and people do).

The entire point of this conversation has been that the DDO dev staff cannot simply universally remove or stop using the CC nerfs they have used for 2 years running - without modifying the spells that were originally taken advantage of (and which continue to be when static immunities to them are not in place), we'll return to exactly where we left off. Consequently, those spells need to be adjusted. Otherwise the second the immunities are gone, every arcane and divine caster on DDO will immediately return to their state of only requiring melee characters to kill raid bosses for them. As you can imagine, that is at least as much of a problem as the one we have now.

I appreciate that you are a new player and lack the historical perspective of how the game has been before, but CC has not been worthless for the entire life of DDO, and until content started getting regularly released with absurd immunities to CC (and incidently immunity to fire), there was simply no reason to group with a melee character outside of sheer generousity. They were completely and utterly irrelevant.

A return to that state is even less acceptable than the status quo.