In a recent long log of a raid on the Spire, if you look at the numbers, there are 17 spells that get through manacles, and manacles only stop 6 spells.

Manacles had 23 attempts at spell stoppage, and worked 6 times, for a success rate of 26%.


I am just wondering, if this jives and is on par with the intended design for neo-manacles. To be honest, I'm surprised the success rate is so low.

I just don't think that giving manacles sequestor effect for 1 hour duration makes up for that.

Of course, the log may be just an extended example of rng, and manacles has an overall successful spell-stoppage rate much higher, but this log does jive with other manacles experiences I've had in the past.


Let me add that I am not wanting this post to come out sounding like I am complaining. If manacles is supposed to be this weak now, I would find that sad but live with it, as it is the imm's choice.
I'm just trying to find out if it was intended for manacles to be this weak when they changed manacles.

And if so, Why?

>I am just wondering, if this jives and is on par with the
>intended design for neo-manacles. To be honest, I'm surprised
>the success rate is so low.

It'll generally stop more than that. Yay, RNG!

>I just don't think that giving manacles sequestor effect for 1
>hour duration makes up for that.

It's not necessarily a 1 hour duration. It can potentially be significantly longer.

As one specific note, you generally get a longer sequester out of an in-PK-range Tribunal's manacles. (Thus, getting a lowbie Trib to manacle the hero criminal you're about to fight instead of doing it yourself is a mixed bag -- less risk for you, but also generally less power.)

Bloody shackles sequester, no surprise, operates on similar principles.

Well, it does have some advantages that should weaken it some:
minus a sizable chunk of dex and str and +AC
it can be applied out of range
it can be applied by ghosts
and it has sequester which is really freakin' annoying when you've got a couple of Tribunals and guards showing up and chasing you around that T intersection at the top.

Compare that to how often, say Bioempathy, actually results in damage to someone affected and how hard it is to land.

Tribunal powers can't be used by ghosts.

Are you sure? I was attacked by special guards called by the Tribunal I had just killed and could've sworn I was manacled by the same ghost when I continued raiding.

Maybe it was just the 'fog of war' but it sure looked like ghosts could do that to me.

I will check, but the last tribby I played I was pretty sure you couldn't. Granted it's been a few months.

G.

Same experience. No flagging, guards, manacles or vigilance. I think I played just a bit after it was changed to that, which would have been a bit over a year or so. I think.

"Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens." - Jimi Hendrix

I think its' crap that bioempathy can be called on ghosts.

I died the other week and was running back to my corpse when an Outlander called bioempathy on me. I had about twenty percent health and had been a ghost for three or four hours. I didn't die to it, nor did it particularly harm me, but being able to call a power on a ghost?

I suspect a newbie (moreso than I, super noob) might have more problems understanding.

To say nothing for times you may lose it in the client spam and such.

Please do not tell me you are seriously talking about changing ANYTHING about the game because of client spam?