Pacify now gives aggro on resist, and gets resisted the majority of the times. Im not sure if this was intentional or not, but its quite a big hit on my xp groups. It was situational before but very nice. Now with this change its a wasted spell slot, since casting it against "back" mobs so they wont come on pull now only assures yourself the full pull instead of a possible smaller one.
Pacify changed?
- Thread starter mwh
- Start date
Pacify already has a downside, it is only situationally useful whereas Sk/monk FD is always useful.
Anyway, if you have a 3spawn, in order for it to work you have to pacify both mobs behind first, and then pull the front. When I first started playing on WR, back up until 45, pacify aggroed on resist, but back then, it was only resisted maybe once out of every 20 casts. Since you always have to pacify the back mobs first, any resist along the way is gonna bring em all anyway, so if you are getting 50% resists, its pointless since only 25% chance you get a benefit. Better to just pretarget mobs for enchanters, so you have less chance of switching targets.
Now with new mob resists, especailly in the places taht you need it(like cmalath, eldenals) it resists constantly.
Anyway, if you have a 3spawn, in order for it to work you have to pacify both mobs behind first, and then pull the front. When I first started playing on WR, back up until 45, pacify aggroed on resist, but back then, it was only resisted maybe once out of every 20 casts. Since you always have to pacify the back mobs first, any resist along the way is gonna bring em all anyway, so if you are getting 50% resists, its pointless since only 25% chance you get a benefit. Better to just pretarget mobs for enchanters, so you have less chance of switching targets.
Now with new mob resists, especailly in the places taht you need it(like cmalath, eldenals) it resists constantly.
Resists is fair and as it should be, I felt it was overpowered when I knew I could cast it with impunity.
I have seen that I get aprox 30% resists (rough estimate never did any real counting) in Cmalath (1) and as long as the mobs were stunalble / mezable/rootable I didnt have much fear of getting the resists I got. This applys to groups of 2 mobs not 3 or more. Didnt even try to split groups of three or more we just ignored them. (we were only a cleric/war/enc at the time)
I used to use cleric pacification (65cleric 62enchanter spell not on this server) to help my monk do splits in HoH and it was hardly resisted even on the lvl 65 yard trash mobs there and if it was I zoned cleric, came back and tried again, resist was about 10% ... in that same line I also see that atone fails more often here as well tho cleric atone seems better than enchanter's blur line oddly.
I have seen that I get aprox 30% resists (rough estimate never did any real counting) in Cmalath (1) and as long as the mobs were stunalble / mezable/rootable I didnt have much fear of getting the resists I got. This applys to groups of 2 mobs not 3 or more. Didnt even try to split groups of three or more we just ignored them. (we were only a cleric/war/enc at the time)
I used to use cleric pacification (65cleric 62enchanter spell not on this server) to help my monk do splits in HoH and it was hardly resisted even on the lvl 65 yard trash mobs there and if it was I zoned cleric, came back and tried again, resist was about 10% ... in that same line I also see that atone fails more often here as well tho cleric atone seems better than enchanter's blur line oddly.
Wiz
NOT DONATING *EVER*
Unless you're fighting really REALLY MR mobs, you won't be getting 50% resist rates.
Even cmal 3 mobs should only have about 20-30% resist rate with average CHA.
I'll see into putting a resist mod or something, but how exactly is having to pac the "back mob first" a downside? :brow:
Even cmal 3 mobs should only have about 20-30% resist rate with average CHA.
I'll see into putting a resist mod or something, but how exactly is having to pac the "back mob first" a downside? :brow:
Easy wizzy, its because when you pacify the back mobs, you ALWAYS get the full pull if its resisted. Sometimes when you pull the front mob, you at least have the chance to get less.
Anyway, I thought one of the ideas of this server, was to have perfect groups less needed for things. Well, take a look at eldenals. The whole castle is gigantic pulls even with pacify. Now with pacify not being near as good, its requiring a monk or SK now. At least paladins had a way to do areas like this before.
So im curious what is in the vision for paladin classbalance wizzy. Months ago I remember everyone saying paladins totally sucked, but now it turns out we apparantly tank too good and pacify was overpowered. Why the sudden change? After I left the shadowhaven guildmeeting for school, I heard there was alot of talk about making it so warriors were even better tanks than knights(as if they arent already). If thats really the goal, have you considered what this does to paladins? If we cant pull even close to as good as SKs and cant tank nearly as good as warriors, what is our role to be? Backup healers? We will never be as good a backup healer as druid or shaman. We do the least dps of any "tank", even with epic mid50s rangers were about equaling my damage at your mobtest the other day.
Anyway, I thought one of the ideas of this server, was to have perfect groups less needed for things. Well, take a look at eldenals. The whole castle is gigantic pulls even with pacify. Now with pacify not being near as good, its requiring a monk or SK now. At least paladins had a way to do areas like this before.
So im curious what is in the vision for paladin classbalance wizzy. Months ago I remember everyone saying paladins totally sucked, but now it turns out we apparantly tank too good and pacify was overpowered. Why the sudden change? After I left the shadowhaven guildmeeting for school, I heard there was alot of talk about making it so warriors were even better tanks than knights(as if they arent already). If thats really the goal, have you considered what this does to paladins? If we cant pull even close to as good as SKs and cant tank nearly as good as warriors, what is our role to be? Backup healers? We will never be as good a backup healer as druid or shaman. We do the least dps of any "tank", even with epic mid50s rangers were about equaling my damage at your mobtest the other day.
Wiz
NOT DONATING *EVER*
mwh said:
:brow:
How is pacing the back mob a drawback if it's risk-free? You used it as an argument to say why this change wasn't needed.
And I've never said Paladins tank too good. What I tried to say at the meeting was that you should need a tank of certain quality to handle certain mobs, be it a warrior or a paladin. You seem very very good at interprenting things in the way that gets you the most sympathy.
Could you handle not trying to put a spin on everything for your own agenda, please?
I never said that having to pacify the back mob was a drawback when it was the way it was before, or at least did not mean to. The way it is NOW, on multiple spawns, you are usually better off just pretargettd a mob for your enchanter then get a resist and guarateed get them all. The reason for this is I can pull with a ae aggro spell, the enchatner and shaman have their targets already done. If im pulling with a spell that probably is gonna fail anyway, and then the enchanter and shaman are trying to find targets, against mobs in cma3 that can kill a enchanter in a round or two, whats the point? Anyway, we could have pages of stuff on what I like to do on pulling, but you clearly dont want to change pacify and you arent understanding what im trying to say.
Also, how about not taking potshots? You accuse me of spinning things for my own agenda? You said yourself, I have a screenshot of some of the things that were given to me about this subject after I left , that this would increase the difference between Knights and Warriors. So since you said that this was at least a side-effect of some changes you were putting in, how exactly am I supposed to take it?
So you are saying now that you do not want to increase the difference between warriors and knights? If you are, then thats different from the impression you gave an awful lot of people at the end of the server meeting in SH.
: editted to be less snarky
Also, how about not taking potshots? You accuse me of spinning things for my own agenda? You said yourself, I have a screenshot of some of the things that were given to me about this subject after I left , that this would increase the difference between Knights and Warriors. So since you said that this was at least a side-effect of some changes you were putting in, how exactly am I supposed to take it?
So you are saying now that you do not want to increase the difference between warriors and knights? If you are, then thats different from the impression you gave an awful lot of people at the end of the server meeting in SH.
: editted to be less snarky
Wiz
NOT DONATING *EVER*
If you had paid any attention you would've seen that I said I'll look over changing the resist rate of it.
And you pretty much reinforced my point. I said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect.
That does not equal to "Paladins tank too good, we must nerf them". That's a spin. Hell, Coltaine could in the same way spin it as if the nerf was aimed directly at him, since he could no longer tank Tarhyl.
So, quit the spin doctoring. I'm not out to get you here. I'll test Pacify and probably change the resist rates.
And you pretty much reinforced my point. I said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect.
That does not equal to "Paladins tank too good, we must nerf them". That's a spin. Hell, Coltaine could in the same way spin it as if the nerf was aimed directly at him, since he could no longer tank Tarhyl.
So, quit the spin doctoring. I'm not out to get you here. I'll test Pacify and probably change the resist rates.
See, this is what is confusing me.
" said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect. "
Then if paladins were tanking fine before, and we are getting unavoidably hurt more than warriors, then excuse me for feeling its a bit unfair
Anyway, we are arguing the same thing on two different threads. Ill copy some of this to the other thread.
" said that yes, this will increase the gap in the sense that Warriors will be better tanks for boss mobs that your guild is struggling to take, but that wasn't the intention, just an unavoidable side effect. "
Then if paladins were tanking fine before, and we are getting unavoidably hurt more than warriors, then excuse me for feeling its a bit unfair
Anyway, we are arguing the same thing on two different threads. Ill copy some of this to the other thread.
I used the AE pacify in DN yesterday on a three split (two were necros with pets so 5 mobs) and sure enough the far one resisted and I ended up having to mez/root 4 mobs... would have been easier just to mez/blur one and then mez/root 2 or 3 mobs and not wasted extra mana on a useless cast.
AE is just too risky to use if its gonna fail its gonna fail big, the pacify range modification is negligable on most pulls if one resists and then runs too close to or dirctly over one that it did work on. You cant predict which one will resist so you cant predict where to stand to have the resiting one be toward the front during the attempt to pacify.
Even hate pulling creates less agro than a resist. Even in DN it was around 30% failures ... IE on every 3rd split type pull Ragarr has to run and taunt every mob that agroed to help give me time to mez/root/stun/etc.
I think DN is about qual to CMal 1 for difficulty with the exception that CMal mobs have higher resists and hp. Ragarr mentioned that the exp seemed better in DN (probable more mobs killed in shorter time) I am hoping that the spell Pacification will be added. As a cleric that helped on pulls I LOVED that spell.
_____________
Bella (61 Enchanter)
AE is just too risky to use if its gonna fail its gonna fail big, the pacify range modification is negligable on most pulls if one resists and then runs too close to or dirctly over one that it did work on. You cant predict which one will resist so you cant predict where to stand to have the resiting one be toward the front during the attempt to pacify.
Even hate pulling creates less agro than a resist. Even in DN it was around 30% failures ... IE on every 3rd split type pull Ragarr has to run and taunt every mob that agroed to help give me time to mez/root/stun/etc.
I think DN is about qual to CMal 1 for difficulty with the exception that CMal mobs have higher resists and hp. Ragarr mentioned that the exp seemed better in DN (probable more mobs killed in shorter time) I am hoping that the spell Pacification will be added. As a cleric that helped on pulls I LOVED that spell.
_____________
Bella (61 Enchanter)
(copied from another thread)
Thank you (and I wish this could double post to both chains... I'll just copy/past).
I had forgoten that about pacify before... your right, it did sometimes not agro on a resist... THATs why it was more effective with resists even... thanks again.
__________
Bella
Wiz said:
Thank you (and I wish this could double post to both chains... I'll just copy/past).
I had forgoten that about pacify before... your right, it did sometimes not agro on a resist... THATs why it was more effective with resists even... thanks again.
__________
Bella