Weapon Swing delays and Archery trial on Test Center

[nutbagthecat]

[*]No more passive skill gains for crafting, meditation, or anatomy

Does this mean unequiping, then re-equiping a magical wizards hat will no longer cause you to gain meditation?

Yes, you'll actually have the activly use the skill

I'm sure there was discussion on this, but i vividly remember gaining meditation passively. I recall having to lock it on my non-mage characters because the skill would rise rapidly every time i rezed.

[Derrick]

The discussion on this and the patch note is in this thread:
http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2926

[Faust]

Passive gains for meditation was added March 9th, 2000. This means that it was only active during one month of the year and half that the second age existed. I wouldn't really consider this a t2a feature. It was patched in long after pre casting was removed.

[lonewolf_cody]

I may be beating an old horse, but I didn't feel like going through the last three pages of this. I personally remember not tabbing out or anyone else tabbing out. I remember moving away from a person til my attack charged and then moving in for a hit and then repeating.

[Derrick]

I may be beating an old horse, but I didn't feel like going through the last three pages of this. I personally remember not tabbing out or anyone else tabbing out. I remember moving away from a person til my attack charged and then moving in for a hit and then repeating.

This is the way I remember fighting as well, but many other's don't. I wasn't really an "advanced" pvper either though.

Trying to get someone to wrestle to ruin their swing was apparently a valid tactic.

[Mazer]

Trying to get someone to wrestle to ruin their swing was apparently a valid tactic.

It is with and without auto-attack in place.

[Faust]

Actually it isn't if you tab out. There is no way you can force them to wrestle without it. It was impossible during t2a for one to avoid being forced to wrestle.

[platy]

That seems a little bit strange to me, I was taught to tab out to hold hits.
What do you remember Mazer? How would it be possible to wrestle off opponents instahits if there was no auto-defend in place?
Please discuss?

[Faust]

I've done some testing with this on the demo and it works as I expected it to do. Before I confirmed this through guard actions since they attack repeatedly every mili second making you auto defend. I done a full trial run tonight involving taming.

I first went with the default version of RunUO which is setup without auto defend after tabbing out. I used a tamed dog that I told to attack me. I would tab out and tell it to attack me once more. This produced no auto defend as expected of course.

Secondly, I did the same exact procedure on the demo. When I would tell the dog to attack me after tabbing out I would auto defend, because he would literally be re-attacking me again.

The conclusion on this is that it completely showed my theory involving the guard worked as I exptected it to. If you also add the discussion thread with all the produced evidence that I generated involving the removal of it, this only means that it works as it's suppose to on here. The only problem is that there was in fact no auto attack feature on any 3rd party programs. However, I would prefer having someone hold a key down the entire time(if they truly wanted to do so) than removing the ability to not ever be able to waste someone's insta hit by making them wrestle which was a vital and key tactic during the '99 era.

[kill drizitz]

I've done some testing with this on the demo and it works as I expected it to do. Before I confirmed this through guard actions since they attack repeatedly every mili second making you auto defend. I done a full trial run tonight involving taming.

I first went with the default version of RunUO which is setup without auto defend after tabbing out. I used a tamed dog that I told to attack me. I would tab out and tell it to attack me once more. This produced no auto defend as expected of course.

Secondly, I did the same exact procedure on the demo. When I would tell the dog to attack me after tabbing out I would auto defend, because he would literally be re-attacking me again.

The conclusion on this is that it completely showed my theory involving the guard worked as I exptected it to. If you also add the discussion thread with all the produced evidence that I generated involving the removal of it, this only means that it works as it's suppose to on here. The only problem is that there was in fact no auto attack feature on any 3rd party programs. However, I would prefer having someone hold a key down the entire time(if they truly wanted to do so) than removing the ability to not ever be able to waste someone's insta hit by making them wrestle which was a vital and key tactic during the '99 era.

since everyone agrees holding down an attack last macro is not good, but devs have "confirmed" autodefend, then perhaps slowing the time the autodefend would be recognized if possible would remedy the problem? ive seen derrick say he thinks that an attack last macro would discourage pvp, obviously the majority of the people who play here agree with this. perhaps make it something VERY short to not make it impossible either way. i was thinking maybe making the time before someone autodefends an attack like .3-.5 seconds. this way, mages who arent on thier guard will still get instahits taken away, and even tabbing out like crazy is not guaranteed to stop the autodefend. it gives most mages an extra fighting chance, and still allows those who abuse this feature that was NOT part of t2a (attack last, not autodefend) the ability to null someones instahit. i know nothing of scripting so if this is impossible then forget it. but im just trying to figure out a way that this autodefend can be implimented, but not so devistating because of the advances in uo gameplay i.e. Razor. remember, the problem isnt autodefend its the macros that can be made today which were never part of the era.
no one complained during t2a because no one had an attack last macro running in the back, and on top of that i bet only a couple people would repeatedly attack someone they were already attacking. using that as an answer to some peoples upset posts by devs is very short of upsetting and ignorant.

[Derrick]

That seems a little bit strange to me, I was taught to tab out to hold hits.
What do you remember Mazer? How would it be possible to wrestle off opponents instahits if there was no auto-defend in place?
Please discuss?

I never saw this in era either, but I think the big difference was that you'd actually have to double click someone to attack them then, which made this tactic a little more difficult. (Again /me not a pvper much in era)

There's been some talk in other threads about how you could get someone to autodefend when hidden by using an AOE spell, a purp pot, or having a poison tick hit, which would cause them to autodefend if you were standing next to them; only mentioning that for discussion.

I haven't been able to follow a lot of the discussion on the autodefend topic, mostly because in order for me to continue to keep caught up in the forums I've abandoned the trash talk forum, where I think a lot of this discussion on this has taken place.

[platy]

I understand your testing, but this is how it should work in any case.. If I tab out to someone after having ebolted them, then I cast another ebolt I will auto attack them no? Maybe I am thinking more along the lines of agressive actions but I just cannot wrap my hands around the auto-DEFEND portion.. It just doesn't seem right to me: I used to get dumped on in OSI and don't remember attacking everyone who was targeting me... not by any means (specifically when it came to my Resist traning).
I guess it COULD be possible I didn't notice my agressor was switching constantly but i sincerely doubt that the case, anyways maybe a limit like driz suggested would help, because as it is I feel the instahit IS removed while your fighting a dexer (at least ones smart enough to understand the advantage to using 100dex/veryfast wep/attacklast loop).. which was NOT the case since there WAS no attacklast for a while?
I don't really want the attack last macro to have so much clout: But I would like to be able to use combo's that I DID use for a FACT on OSI more often.

[platy]

Just FYI I do accept this is accurate but we DO have razor now I just want it to be a little bit more like the old days (even though razor usage is inevitable) where instahits WERE used more often.. I asked my brother (formerly b0mb) and he only played a theif on OSI.. he told me he WOULD have to continuously tab out while hidden if he was poisoned so I am not arguing the validity of auto-defend, just looking for a solution to make it more compatible with razor possibly?

[Derrick]

This is an extremely valid point.
There are some limitations on the autodefend, for example, if you have another combabatant, it doesn't change your combatant. It ony autodefends when you're not fighting someone else, so there wouldn't have been combatant switching. I think using some limiter that reduces the effectivness of simply marcoing an attack loop is very reasonable to counter the inaccuracy of attack last, which we can't do anything about. Still thinking on this one

[Faust]

platy,

I owe it to you on this one. Your response got me thinking further on this matter. I decided to take up some more testing for this feature on the demo, and what do you know. I grabbed a mage and took him out of town. For each and every spell that he casted on me I would immediately auto defend. This concludes that auto defend in fact is based on aggressive actions. This makes a lot more sense now, because attacking an individual is obviously an aggressive action... The auto defend cause was always there, it was just not fully developed in the way that it should have. I definitely give you props on this one.

Thanks,
Faust