Prevalence of channeling mobs
Prevalence of channeling mobs
I was speaking to a couple SS after todays pk and both mentioned that they'd prefer to do away with channeling damane mobs in some areas due to how unpredictable they are.
On one hand this surprised me quite a bit; to be blunt using a damane mob can turn an unwinnable situation into multiple kills, if you are lucky.
It sounds like its that "if" that's the contention.
It seems like these pkers (who are better than me) would prefer predictable mob support to this.
I think it's reasonable enough to suggest;
If each damane/suldam pair were replaced by an imperial officer with 2 grouped mobs for example, that can chase and track.
Please note I'd recommend this for Tower as well - I mean maybe keep some channeling mobs in the Tower zone itself; but I'd love to have some roaming grouped mobs that can actually be used in pk. I usually think I'm pretty good in Tower Zones and pking around agro mobs but occasionally I'll still enter the Tower on an alt and instant die to 4-5 spikes.
What do people think? What do the imms think?
If players unilaterally support this and imms are open to it.. maybe we'll see changes?
On one hand this surprised me quite a bit; to be blunt using a damane mob can turn an unwinnable situation into multiple kills, if you are lucky.
It sounds like its that "if" that's the contention.
It seems like these pkers (who are better than me) would prefer predictable mob support to this.
I think it's reasonable enough to suggest;
If each damane/suldam pair were replaced by an imperial officer with 2 grouped mobs for example, that can chase and track.
Please note I'd recommend this for Tower as well - I mean maybe keep some channeling mobs in the Tower zone itself; but I'd love to have some roaming grouped mobs that can actually be used in pk. I usually think I'm pretty good in Tower Zones and pking around agro mobs but occasionally I'll still enter the Tower on an alt and instant die to 4-5 spikes.
What do people think? What do the imms think?
If players unilaterally support this and imms are open to it.. maybe we'll see changes?
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
I don't think this makes sense. I think it's good at the current rate. There's a no channel with a pat, and a channeling chasing mob duo. Both are fairly easy to play. If the goal is to have numbers chase inside, I think you have options as is.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
Channeling mobs make no sense. They shouldn’t exist barring global quest or imm controlled during mob raid.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
As one of those SS, I'll pipe in with a blanket "I dislike channeling mobs." Whether its damane, dreadlords, or sedai mobs.
Specifically regarding the one in Tarendelle, it's way too unpredictable which hurts both the attackers and the defenders. Sometimes it will go 3-4 rounds and do nothing and sometimes it will blind, contagion, and 2x spike within the space of a round of combat. With regular patties it is easy to gauge the amount of damage they will put out and the agro can reliably be split between attacking forces. It would be nice to have something in between the strength of the gate mobs and lunal as a fall back point within TD. A small, chasing imperial patty would be perfect as a replacement as draz said above. Which would be nice as it would be a small mirror of what ss face in WB with the insane chasing call-mob.
As a case of using the damane as a fallback against overwhelming forces, I would say that that is almost always what Lunal would be used for or SS just wouldn't stick around and would head west. The damane just makes everyone play too cautiously and impedes what could be good pk.
I don't necessarily think any changes need to be made in falme, or tar valon or keep, but the solo channeling mobs at central pk points like tarenedelle, blodfest, wb, could be addressed.
Specifically regarding the one in Tarendelle, it's way too unpredictable which hurts both the attackers and the defenders. Sometimes it will go 3-4 rounds and do nothing and sometimes it will blind, contagion, and 2x spike within the space of a round of combat. With regular patties it is easy to gauge the amount of damage they will put out and the agro can reliably be split between attacking forces. It would be nice to have something in between the strength of the gate mobs and lunal as a fall back point within TD. A small, chasing imperial patty would be perfect as a replacement as draz said above. Which would be nice as it would be a small mirror of what ss face in WB with the insane chasing call-mob.
As a case of using the damane as a fallback against overwhelming forces, I would say that that is almost always what Lunal would be used for or SS just wouldn't stick around and would head west. The damane just makes everyone play too cautiously and impedes what could be good pk.
I don't necessarily think any changes need to be made in falme, or tar valon or keep, but the solo channeling mobs at central pk points like tarenedelle, blodfest, wb, could be addressed.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
Perhaps we could add mobol at all the channeling mobs to remove their effects.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
Channeling mobs are bad. Sul'dam/damane are probably the most annoying, followed by DGs.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
Damane can blind contagion and 250hps damage in a round when weather is bad and bad luck on pulses.
The unpredictability of instant mob weaves vs normal channeler(misses combat round channeling spikes/fb etc) are rough for anyone to intentionally risk.
Static fall back points of very strong mobs aren't good for pk either, the sugestion of a strong tracking patrol is great and something i sugested for ragan in another thread as well.
Reliable strength of mobs is good, better when there's variables around it like it wandering/tracking changing room exits. Some mob support to promote pk not inside giant dead end chokes is good.
Kajin is a good example of a mob support area that's had many fights go either direction, there's not 1 dead end choke making it all or nothing and not a static doom room.
If something like that wasn't right by a city it could be weaker.(kajin specifically mob strength is strong close by a city to make losing pk viable instead of everyone just going inside)
CTF mobs are also great with reasonable strength non channeling mobs.
I dont know if it's possible for ctf mobs to be wandering/tracking or if they have to be specific room for their swap mobol to work.
As always the difficulty is in balancing against stab/charge.
The unpredictability of instant mob weaves vs normal channeler(misses combat round channeling spikes/fb etc) are rough for anyone to intentionally risk.
Static fall back points of very strong mobs aren't good for pk either, the sugestion of a strong tracking patrol is great and something i sugested for ragan in another thread as well.
Reliable strength of mobs is good, better when there's variables around it like it wandering/tracking changing room exits. Some mob support to promote pk not inside giant dead end chokes is good.
Kajin is a good example of a mob support area that's had many fights go either direction, there's not 1 dead end choke making it all or nothing and not a static doom room.
If something like that wasn't right by a city it could be weaker.(kajin specifically mob strength is strong close by a city to make losing pk viable instead of everyone just going inside)
CTF mobs are also great with reasonable strength non channeling mobs.
I dont know if it's possible for ctf mobs to be wandering/tracking or if they have to be specific room for their swap mobol to work.
As always the difficulty is in balancing against stab/charge.
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
I think strong channeling mobs are good for anyone playing defense against otherwise unfightable odds - Falme vs 10+, keep vs 10+, TV vs 10+ , blodest against 6+, etc.
All these gambits would be dumb and not worth trying/risking for the defender except for the luck factor of these channeling mobs. I do agree that tarrendrelle and Seanchan outpost might be better with a really strong patrol instead of the channeler mob (but again, then you wouldn't want to defend these places against big numbers).
All these gambits would be dumb and not worth trying/risking for the defender except for the luck factor of these channeling mobs. I do agree that tarrendrelle and Seanchan outpost might be better with a really strong patrol instead of the channeler mob (but again, then you wouldn't want to defend these places against big numbers).
Re: Prevalence of channeling mobs
Zeeb as usual mostly sums this up to perfection. There are certain instances in which these types of things are needed. Like when your the only brave soul willing to fight stupid odds. I’ve been there more times then I can count. Outnumbered by 3-10 plus, solo and basically 0 chance to do anything. Vs multiple bonused chars and channelers themselves. The problem is use of these mobs. I see a lot of poor use of mobs like said by Draz. There’s a time and a place to use mobs like this. For instance I often try to use Granlin or whatever when alone vs big groups. This sometimes gets me killed. Also very rarely gets me a kill or two. That I would never get without a charge or stab in said scenario.Zeeb wrote: ↑Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:00 amI think strong channeling mobs are good for anyone playing defense against otherwise unfightable odds - Falme vs 10+, keep vs 10+, TV vs 10+ , blodest against 6+, etc.
All these gambits would be dumb and not worth trying/risking for the defender except for the luck factor of these channeling mobs. I do agree that tarrendrelle and Seanchan outpost might be better with a really strong patrol instead of the channeler mob (but again, then you wouldn't want to defend these places against big numbers).