Getting guard whacked outside the guard zone.

[nightshark]

No, it is not. I played well into UO:R and even then guards behaved exactly like the code would suggest.

I am open to the possibility that they might have somehow been limited by server lines, but it seems unlikely that I would never have run into this problem.

Your objections seem to be motivated by you not wanting it to be that way, rather than concerns about accuracy.

I personally also PK and it's not like I want to get guard whacked. I just want the shard to be accurate to how OSI was because nostalgia for those days is mostly what keeps me playing. EDIT: And also although I have said it many many times, all you do is NOT cast explosion on someone with recall prepared. Poison is pretty useless anyways since people have cure potions.

Your objections seem to be motivated by you not wanting it to be that way, rather than concerns about accuracy.

I personally also PK and it's not like I want to get guard whacked. I just want the shard to be accurate to how OSI was because nostalgia for those days is mostly what keeps me playing. EDIT: And also although I have said it many many times, all you do is NOT cast explosion on someone with recall prepared. Poison is pretty useless anyways since people have cure potions.

FYI I don't play a PK here and my concern is that something like this should not be implemented without at least testing multiple sources, rather than relying on the mid-98 code which does not take things like server lines into account. There are other sources that can be tested before the conclusion that the '98 demo code is 100% accurate to late '99s live servers.

Yes, people have cure pots but many farmers don't carry them, and it can play a big role in PvP when you are forcing people to drop their spell targets to chug a cure. Like I said before, all DD spells have a delay and there is the possibility of getting whacked regardless. We can't just completely limit something like using poison without some hard evidence. The fact is that this is game-changing enough that it shouldn't be taken so lightly to draw an instant conclusion from a snippet of the mid-'98 demo code.

[marvin]

So then fight guild wars or order/chaos if you want to use spells like poison without any risk of being guard whacked.

Or be a noto-PK and only kill greys and reds.

You're saying its game changing, but really what was game changing was not having accurate guards in the first place. Guards were always like this on OSI.

[Derrick]

Another missing piece to add to this.

The only players to whom this applied were witnesses to the crime, i.e., those that got a "you notice..." or "you see X attacking Y!"

This is something that is not currently included.

[nightshark]

So then fight guild wars or order/chaos if you want to use spells like poison without any risk of being guard whacked.

Or be a noto-PK and only kill greys and reds.

You're saying its game changing, but really what was game changing was not having accurate guards in the first place. Guards were always like this on OSI.

If it's game changing enough to be the difference for a player to stop PKing and play O/C or noto instead, would you not say that is game changing?

It's not really myself I care about in this situation, I don't even PK. Heck I don't even PvP. Look at my character, in 3 months I've killed 5 people, 2 of them were the same person who was just a noob stealther looting my AW kills.

Not really anything left to discuss. The point is that further testing can be made on this before a conclusion is jumped to.

[Derrick]

I think we all want this to be accurate, I don't think anyone involved in the last three pages of this conversation is motivated by their own in-game interests.

I'm going to do my absolute best to match what we know to be true as closely as possible before this is released.

[nightshark]

I think we all want this to be accurate, I don't think anyone involved in the last three pages of this conversation is motivated by their own in-game interests.

I'm going to do my absolute best to match what we know to be true as closely as possible before this is released.

Am I correct that there is a second demo, from a later date that can be tested? What time frame does this reflect?

[Derrick]

Am I correct that there is a second demo, from a later date that can be tested? What time frame does this reflect?

Not that I'm aware of :/

If we knew of this we'd certainly be using it

[nightshark]

Not that I'm aware of :/

If we knew of this we'd certainly be using it

Ah okay. So the only sources available are the demo and live servers. I thought I heard someone mention a second demo.

[Derrick]

Ah okay. So the only sources available are the demo and live servers. I thought I heard someone mention a second demo.

There are lots of other credible sources, OSI website, patch notes, news groups, guild websites, etc. All have to be weighed against each-other though; there is no one ultimate source of correctness unfortunately.

[Kaivan]

Ok, I'm seeing some misinformation floating around in this thread and it's time to correct it.

First thing is first: the location of a criminal action is assessed at the point that an innocent takes damage, is stolen from, is actively attacked someone (by double clicking them), or if someone commits a victimless crime such as looting a corpse.

Given that, we can look at the demo code and write up this general analysis for how the code functions:

• When guards are called two checks are made.
• First, if the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of the point where the criminal action took place, and the criminal action took place in a justice region, the check succeeds and guards are called.
• If the person who committed the criminal action is not within 25 tiles of the point where the criminal action took place, this portion of the check fails. This ultimately completes the check for victimless crimes.
• If the first check fails, the distance from the victim of the crime is checked. If the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of their victim, and the criminal action took place in a justice region, the check succeeds and guards are called.
• If the criminal is more than 25 tiles from their victim, the check fails and the script returns without a guard call.

Given that description and the information about when a criminal action is assessed, lets put together some scenarios:

Scenario 1: A person casts poison on an innocent player and that player recalls to town and calls guards on the next poison tick.

In this scenario, the first poison tick from the poison spell is assessed as the crime location, which is outside of guards. When the player recalls to town, he waits for the poison to tick. When that happens, the new criminal action location is assessed at the point where the poison ticked (because that's where he took the damage). The player then calls guards. The witness check will see that the crime location (which is now in a justice region) and the victim of the crime are very far away from the attacker. Thus, the attacker will not have guards called on them (as per the code).

Scenario 2: A player recalls right after an explosion is cast on them and calls guards once the explosion hits while standing in guards.

Again, in this scenario, the explosion damage is assessed in town, and as such, so is the criminal action. When the witness check is done, the attacker is very far away from the criminal action and will not be killed.

Scenario 3: A player is standing at the edge of guard zone (inside) or near a moongate and an attacker casts explosion on them and runs away very quickly.

Again, in this scenario, if the attacker can put more than 25 tiles distance between the victim and himself before the explosion goes off, when the victim calls guards, the criminal will not be punishable because he is more than 25 tiles away from the crime (I point out this scenario because it happened regularly during UO:R and any knowledgeable player could get out of range of guards and never get guard whacked).

As you can see, none of these scenarios allow a player to recall to town and guard whack anyone who is outside of town because each time that damage was assessed, the crime location changed to match the location of the most recent damage.

[marvin]

First, if the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of the point where the criminal action took place

No, the first check is checking the distance between the person who called the guards (the witness) and the crime location.

If the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of their victim, and the criminal action took place in a justice region, the check succeeds and guards are called.

Again, no. The second check is checking the distance between the witness and the criminal.

I believe I covered this already:

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic. ... 12#p157512

[Kaivan]

First, if the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of the point where the criminal action took place

No, the first check is checking the distance between the person who called the guards (the witness) and the crime location.

If the person who committed the criminal action is within 25 tiles of their victim, and the criminal action took place in a justice region, the check succeeds and guards are called.

Again, no. The second check is checking the distance between the witness and the criminal.

I believe I covered this already:

http://forum.uosecondage.com/viewtopic. ... 12#p157512

You're right about the distance check, however testing with both explosion and poison on the demo conclusively show that casting these spells on a person inside guard zone and then getting more than 25 tiles away from the victim renders you invulnerable to getting killed by the guards (even if you get the "Guards can now be called on you!" message).

Edit: Also, testing on the demo (which I had never done the due diligence on) reveals 2 other facts:

• Poison ticks are not considered attacks (that is, each tick is not considered you attacking the victim).
• Explosion does the animation and sound (and makes you eligible to be guardwhacked) as soon as the spell is cast, but the actual damage and the report that you are attacking a person does not happen for 3 seconds. This explains the January 99 patch note which makes the explosion spell "instant" (that is the animation, sound and damage all happen at the same instant).

[MatronDeWinter]

Edit: Also, testing on the demo (which I had never done the due diligence on) reveals 2 other facts:

• Poison ticks are not considered attacks (that is, each tick is not considered you attacking the victim).
• Explosion does the animation and sound (and makes you eligible to be guardwhacked) as soon as the spell is cast, but the actual damage and the report that you are attacking a person does not happen for 3 seconds. This explains the January 99 patch note which makes the explosion spell "instant" (that is the animation, sound and damage all happen at the same instant).

So, the criminal trigger is applied immediately on targeting, only the damage comes with the delay (talking about explosion)? Would that mean that you can explode someone outside of town, and they could not run inside and call guards if you targeted them before they got inside.

If the above proves positive, would it be safe to assume that other damage spells (most are 1 second) have the same outcome?

[Kaivan]

Edit: Also, testing on the demo (which I had never done the due diligence on) reveals 2 other facts:

• Poison ticks are not considered attacks (that is, each tick is not considered you attacking the victim).
• Explosion does the animation and sound (and makes you eligible to be guardwhacked) as soon as the spell is cast, but the actual damage and the report that you are attacking a person does not happen for 3 seconds. This explains the January 99 patch note which makes the explosion spell "instant" (that is the animation, sound and damage all happen at the same instant).

So, the criminal trigger is applied immediately on targeting, only the damage comes with the delay (talking about explosion)? Would that mean that you can explode someone outside of town, and they could not run inside and call guards if you targeted them before they got inside.

If the above proves positive, would it be safe to assume that other damage spells (most are 1 second) have the same outcome?

Ok, this took a while to find the answer for (had to work through the scripts), but these spells can be set up to have guards be called at any time that they want. For example, it is possible for them to have the spell act as an aggressive action at the beginning (like we see across the board with the demo), or they can have it act as an aggressive action at the moment that damage is done. All it really requires is that they move the variables around to different portions of the script.

[nightshark]

• Poison ticks are not considered attacks (that is, each tick is not considered you attacking the victim).

I was sure of this one, but didn't mention it because I was certain it would be shut down. Poison ticks shouldn't get you guard whacked.

I don't know if you want to check this one either, because in a way it isn't relevant - but I believe you shouldn't receive a "xxxxx is attacking you!" message on running through a firewall. I'm not sure a firewall should count toward murder counts, period. If I had the bandwidth for downloading the demo there's so much crap I'd test. Once I can afford to change ISPs I will test a whole lot of shit.

edit: firewall, lol... too much 1998 battlenet

Ok, this took a while to find the answer for (had to work through the scripts), but these spells can be set up to have guards be called at any time that they want. For example, it is possible for them to have the spell act as an aggressive action at the beginning (like we see across the board with the demo), or they can have it act as an aggressive action at the moment that damage is done. All it really requires is that they move the variables around to different portions of the script.

What does "can be set up" mean? Any time who wants? Where is the guard check done in the demo? Beginning, end, or both?